Because the Constitution does not explicitly call a convention for proposing amendments a “convention of the states,” some convention opponents still argue that its nature and composition is a mystery.
The “mystery” claim is no longer viable. We now have copious and uncontradicted evidence that the Founders understood it to be a convention of the states—a kind of meeting with which they were very familiar. This is significant because the Supreme Court tells us we should interpret the Constitution’s amendment process in the light of historical understanding. Moreover, the Court itself has characterized an amendments convention as a “convention of the states.”
I have written a research paper entitled Why a Convention for Proposing Amendments is a “Convention of the States.” It was published by the Heartland Institute, and it collects the evidence on the subject. You can access it here.