Which describes the 'States only' method of amending the Constitution?

• A. States call a Constitutional Convention with two-thirds of states; amendments take effect when three-fourths of the states ratify.
• B. The President can directly propose amendments via executive order.
• C. Amendments require only a simple majority in the states.
• D. The Supreme Court can amend the constitution through judicial interpretation.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is how constitutional amendments actually get made, which is by formal steps that require broad state involvement. The phrase “States only” refers to the route where states drive the process without needing the president or the courts to approve the change. In this path, when two-thirds of the states call for a Constitutional Convention, that convention can propose amendments, and any proposed amendments must be ratified by three-fourths of the states to become part of the Constitution. This emphasizes that both the proposal and the approval rely on state action rather than a presidential signature or judicial ruling.

That’s why this option is the best description. It correctly captures the two-stage process—state-led initiation through a convention and ratification by the states—that defines the method known as the “states only” pathway to amending the Constitution. The other ideas miss the mark because a president cannot issue executive orders to amend the Constitution, amendments require a supermajority (not just a simple majority) of states to ratify, and the Supreme Court cannot amend the Constitution through its rulings; it can interpret, but not officially amend, the text.