Which 27–28 states have current active applications for an Article V convention, and which applications have been rescinded?

1. Where the headline numbers come from — competing tallies and advocacy counts

Advocacy groups maintain their own progress maps and claim specific counts: Convention of States posts an interactive “Progress Map” and states that have passed its model Article V application (the site highlights 19 passed COS resolutions as of its page content) and promotes its model language to state legislatures ^{[1] [4]}. ALEC supplies a near‑identical model resolution that state lawmakers frequently use, which helps explain clustering in state adoption of similar language ^[5]. Those advocacy tallies are useful but partial: they record states that adopted that particular formulation, not every historical application on every topic recorded in the Congressional Record ^{[1] [4] [5]}.

2. The historical congressional record and why simple counts are unreliable

Congressional compilations and scholarly reviews show that states have applied on many different subjects across decades; Congress has not consistently tabulated or harmonized those applications in a single living list, and the historical counts themselves have varied — for example, an Article V Library count reported Nevada’s “continuing” application as the 34th in 1979 and noted 39–42 total applications in subsequent years ^[2]. The Congressional Research Service stresses that most modern applications have been limited in scope (for example, the balanced‑budget movement reached 32 applications historically), and that procedural uncertainties about form, subject and longevity complicate any definitive active count ^[6].

3. Rescissions exist — and their legal effect is contested

Multiple sources document that states have rescinded earlier applications and that lists of applications often flag rescindings; Wikipedia’s cataloging of applications explicitly notes that some entries are shown as rescinded and that debates about the validity of rescissions are recurrent ^[3]. Law reviews and legal scholars stress both the existence of rescissions and the absence of settled judicial guidance about whether and when a state’s rescission prevents Congress from counting that state toward the two‑thirds threshold, leaving the legal status of rescinded applications unsettled ^{[7] [8]}.

4. What can and cannot be answered from the provided reporting

From the reporting supplied, it is possible to say: advocacy groups report a partial, topic‑specific set of active applications (Convention of States’ count and map) and academic/government research records dozens of historical applications on multiple topics ^{[1] [2] [6]}. What cannot responsibly be asserted from these sources is a verified list of the precise 27–28 states that currently have legally “active” applications accepted by Congress for a single specific convention demand, nor a conclusive roster of which states’ rescissions would be recognized; the underlying materials show disagreement about counting rules, continuing application language, and the treatment of rescissions ^{[2] [3] [7]}.

5. Guidance for a definitive answer and the competing agendas to watch

A definitive, authoritative list would require consulting the Congressional Record entries for each state application and the Article V Library’s compilations — plus legal judgments if rescissions are contested — because advocacy lists (Convention of States, ALEC templates) reflect political organizing toward a specific limited convention and may omit older or differently worded applications that legal actors could treat differently ^{[2] [4] [5]}. Readers should note the implicit agendas: Convention of States and ALEC promote limited, fiscal/term‑limit conventions and therefore highlight enactments matching their model language, while academic and governmental sources stress legal uncertainty and a patchwork record ^{[4] [5] [6] [7]}.