ARTICLE 1 SECTION 1
“All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
ARTICLE 1 SECTION 3
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State…”
… and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. This is an entrenched clause
What is an Entrenched or Entrenchment Clause?
An entrenched clause or entrenchment clause of a basic law or Constitution is a provision that makes certain amendments either more difficult or impossible to pass, making such amendments inadmissible. Overriding an entrenched clause may require a super majority, a referendum, or the consent of the minority party.
Once adopted, a properly drafted entrenchment clause makes some portion of a basic law or constitution irrevocable except through the assertion of the right of revolution.
"Any amendment to a basic law or constitution, which would not satisfy the prerequisites enshrined in a valid entrenched clause would lead to so-called "unconstitutional constitutional law", that is, an amendment to constitutional law text that would appear to be constitutional law by its form, albeit unconstitutional due to the procedure used to enact it or due to the content of its provisions.
Entrenched clauses are, in some cases, justified as protecting the rights of a minority from the dangers of majority rule. In other cases, the objective may be to prevent amendments to the basic law or constitution which would pervert the fundamental principles enshrined in it. However, entrenched clauses are often challenged by their opponents as being undemocratic".
Article V shields the first clause of Article I, Section 3, which provides for equal representation and suffrage of the states in the United States Senate, from being amended, though not absolutely. This has been interpreted to require unanimous ratification of any amendment altering the composition of the United States Senate. However, the text of the clause would indicate that the size of the Senate could be changed by an ordinary amendment if each state continued to have equal representation.
This loophole provides the necessary opportunity to alter the basic concept of the Senates governance powers. Because of the unique MSA Contiguous Overlay Zone relationship between the States and MSA’s they provide a new typology of governance and power sharing that allows the states to have their continued equal suffrage and acquire additional governance powers as well. Because MSA’s can transcend the boundaries of the states they signify that they are both one with the states and yet separate from the states. Thus making the MSA’s a unique entity relative to the constitutionality of their governance status within the U.S. Senate.
Therefore, under the new Constitutional Amendment, there would be two separate and unique layers of political governance bestowed on the U.S. Senate that would be duly recognized in the Constitution. And this new typology of governance would be representative of the power at the State and MSA levels. And since there would be a “new layer of governance” within the United States Senate, it would not, by definition, deprive the “States of their equal suffrage” in the U.S. Senate and would not infringe upon the “Entrenchment Clause” in the Constitution.