a two thirds vote of the House and a two thirds vote of the Senate, followed by ratification by two thirds of the states. The way to amend the Constitution is NOT simply to "interpret" it the way you would like to see it read.

On the general concept, I tend to agree, even though amending the Constitution of the United States has become a pipe dream.

If only Roberts would have said that in Citizens' United, though, huh? Especially the part where it says falsely that the Framers always thought corporations were people. Imagine the Framers leaving something like that to the imagination.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, with whom JUSTICE SCALIA,
JUSTICE THOMAS, and JUSTICE ALITO join, dissenting.
Just over a century ago, Arizona became the second
State in the Union to ratify the Seventeenth Amendment.
That Amendment transferred power to choose United
States Senators from “the Legislature” of each State,
Art. I, §3, to “the people thereof.” The Amendment resulted
from an arduous, decades-long campaign in which
reformers across the country worked hard to garner approval
from Congress and three-quarters of the States.
What chumps! Didn’t they realize that all they had to
do was interpret the constitutional term “the Legislature”
to mean “the people”? The Court today performs just such
a magic trick with the Elections Clause. Art. I, §4. That
Clause vests congressional redistricting authority in “the
Legislature” of each State. An Arizona ballot initiative
transferred that authority from “the Legislature” to an
“Independent Redistricting Commission.” The majority
approves this deliberate constitutional evasion by doing
what the proponents of the Seventeenth Amendment
dared not: revising “the Legislature” to mean “the people.”


The rest of the decision is here, and in Good Reads: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-1314_kjfl.pdf