119-HJRES-186 Journalist Public Summary
119 · HJRES 186 Congressional Apportionment Amendment Deadline Act
A short House resolution would set a firm December 31, 2026 deadline for states to ratify the long‑pending “Congressional Apportionment Amendment” (Article the First); after that date, any new state ratifications would not count. The move aims to close an open‑ended amendment from 1789 and test Congress’s power to impose a timeline centuries after proposal.
Public Summary: H.J. Res. 186 — Congressional Apportionment Amendment Deadline Act
1) Headline Summary: A proposal to give states until December 31, 2026 to ratify the centuries‑old Congressional Apportionment Amendment; any ratifications after that would not count.
2) What It Does: The resolution sets a ratification cutoff for the “Congressional Apportionment Amendment” (also known as Article the First), which originally went to the states in 1789 without any deadline and is therefore still considered pending business. Supporters point to Supreme Court precedent that Congress may set ratification time limits when it proposes amendments. (en.wikipedia.org)
Why it matters: Closing the window would prevent a very old proposal from remaining indefinitely open—an issue spotlighted when the 27th Amendment (also proposed in 1789) was ratified in 1992 despite having no deadline. It also raises a live legal question: can Congress add a deadline long after an amendment was sent to the states? Past cases and commentary leave room for debate. (archives.gov)
- 3) Who’s For It: Sponsor — Rep. Darrell Issa (R‑CA).
- Backers are likely to argue this sets a clear, reasonable timetable, promotes certainty in the Constitution’s amendment process, and avoids surprise ratifications of centuries‑old proposals. (General rationale; no formal coalition announced.)
- 4) Who’s Against It: Critics may argue Congress lacks authority to change the terms of an amendment after it has been proposed to the states, citing the Justice Department’s 2020 analysis in the ERA context. (justice.gov)
- Others point to Supreme Court guidance suggesting that questions about timeliness for undated proposals are political questions for Congress to confront only if and when enough states ratify—casting doubt on a retroactive deadline. (supreme.justia.com)
5) What’s Next: As of May 14, 2026, the resolution has been introduced and referred to the House Judiciary Committee. If it advances, it would need approval by the House and Senate. While presidential sign‑off isn’t required for proposing amendments, Congress has previously sent amendment‑related deadline measures to the President—for example, a 1978 joint resolution extending the ERA deadline, which President Carter signed while noting a signature wasn’t constitutionally required. (congress.gov)
Discussion