Constitutional Reform

A letter in your May 23 issue contains a serious error regarding revision of the 1901 Constitution of Alabama. Recompiling the constitution was for illustrative purposes, only to show how the present constitution could be improved. In fact, it changes nothing about the existing constitution. At least two separate recompilations of our constitution have been completed as demonstration projects, in response to legislative request. House Resolution 538 asked the Alabama Law Institute for guidance in constitutional revision and to recompile the 1901 constitution to create public awareness of its problems. It was done by our professor Howard Walthall and the State Constitutional Law Project of Samford’s Cumberland School of Law. Senate Joint Resolution No. 88 asked the Legislative Reference Service for a recompilation. Both are excellent documents showing the need for change.

However, such recompilations do not change the constitution in any way, nor do they remove archaic or resist language. No change is brought about by these studies. Rather, recompilations demonstrate the cumbersomeness of our present constitution and how it could benefit from revision.

Precedents and legal principles established under existing constitutional provisions are still valid under any revised constitution. Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana have not faced a plethora of legal actions since major constitutional change – if anything, legal dilemmas are greater under our present constitution.

Thomas E. Corts
President, Samford University