California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Amador Valley Joint Union High Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Equalization, 149 Cal.Rptr. 239, 22 Cal.3d 208, 583 P.2d 1281 (Cal. 1978):
We think it significant that prior to 1962 a constitutional revision could be accomplished Only by the elaborate procedure of the convening of, and action by, a constitutional convention (art. XVIII, 2). This fact suggests that the term "revision" in section XVIII originally was intended to refer to a substantial alteration of the entire Constitution, rather than to a less extensive change in one or more of its provisions. Many years ago, in Livermore v. Waite (1894) 102 Cal. 113, 118-119, 36 P. 424, 426, we described the fundamental distinction between revision and amendment as follows: "The very term 'constitution' implies an instrument of a permanent and abiding nature, and the provisions contained therein for its revision indicate the will of the people that the underlying principles upon which it rests, as well as the substantial entirety of the instrument, shall be of a like permanent and abiding nature. On the other hand, the significance of the term 'amendment' implies such an addition or change within the lines of the original instrument as will effect an improvement, or better carry out the purpose for which it was framed."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.