An amendment is in order when it meets a short list of procedural tests: it must be germane to the motion it changes, it cannot go beyond the second degree, it must be properly moved and seconded, and it must apply to a motion that is open to amendment in the first place. A chair will also rule an amendment out of order if it contradicts a decision the body already made, if it is offered purely to obstruct, if it merely negates the main motion, or, for bylaw changes, if it exceeds the scope of the notice given to members.
The Germaneness Requirement
Germaneness is the test most amendments fail. To be in order, an amendment must relate to the subject of the motion it seeks to change. The U.S. House codified this in 1789 in what is now Rule XVI, clause 7, which bars any proposition “on a subject different from that under consideration” from being “admitted under color of amendment.”1U.S. Government Publishing Office. House Practice – Chapter 26. Germaneness of Amendments Most state legislatures and the standard parliamentary authorities apply the same principle.
Germaneness is stricter than relevance. Two subjects can be related without being germane to one another. A motion authorizing building repairs cannot be amended to add a charitable donation, even though both involve spending money. The subjects are different. The chair’s question is whether the amendment stays within the scope and purpose of the original motion or raises an independent question that belongs as its own motion.
Presiding officers in legislative bodies apply several working tests when a challenge comes up: whether the amendment introduces new subject matter, whether it expands the powers or constraints being proposed, whether it reaches a different class of people than the original measure covers, and whether it would require changing the title of the bill or motion.2U.S. Government Publishing Office. Riddicks Senate Procedure – Germaneness of Amendments In an ordinary club or board meeting the analysis is less formal, but the instinct is the same: does this belong in the same conversation?
If the chair rules an amendment nongermane, the member who proposed it can usually appeal the ruling to the full assembly. The idea itself is not lost. It can be introduced later as a separate main motion once the current business is finished.
The Two-Degree Limit
Parliamentary procedure caps amendments at two levels. A first-degree, or primary, amendment changes the main motion. A second-degree, or secondary, amendment changes the primary amendment. That is as far as it goes. A third-degree amendment is not in order.
The rule comes from Jefferson’s Manual, which admits an amendment to an amendment but states that it “would not be admitted in another degree, to wit, to amend an amendment to an amendment of a main question.” The reason given is practical: “The line must be drawn somewhere, and usage has drawn it after the amendment to the amendment.”3U.S. Government Publishing Office. Deschlers Precedents – Chapter 27 Amendments – Section 6. Amendments in the Third Degree A member who wants to change a second-degree amendment has to vote it down first and then offer a new one with the desired language.
The cap keeps debate tractable. Even two layers of nested changes stretches most assemblies; three would be unworkable, and the record would be nearly impossible for the chair to keep straight.
Motions That Cannot Be Amended at All
Some motions are not open to amendment by their nature, because they put a simple yes-or-no question that modification would distort. Trying to amend one of these is itself out of order, and the chair should say so immediately.
- A motion to adjourn. It cannot be amended, debated, or reconsidered, and it passes by majority vote.
- The previous question, which forces an immediate vote on whatever is pending. Not amendable, not debatable, requires two-thirds.
- A motion to lay on the table, which temporarily sets aside the pending question. Not amendable, not debatable.
- A motion to postpone indefinitely, which effectively kills a main motion. Debatable, but not amendable.
- A point of order, which is a procedural objection decided by the chair. Not amendable, not debatable, no second needed.
Members sometimes try to attach a time to a motion to adjourn (“at 5:00 p.m.”), but that creates a different motion altogether, a motion to fix the time to which to adjourn, and must be handled as its own motion.
Other Grounds the Chair Will Use
Germaneness and the two-degree limit are the big ones, but a chair has several more grounds to rule an amendment out of order.
An amendment is improper if it contradicts a decision the body already made during the same meeting. If the assembly has capped a budget at $10,000, an amendment on a later motion proposing a $15,000 expenditure conflicts with that prior action. The same or substantially the same question cannot be reopened in the same session without going through formal reconsideration.
Dilatory amendments, offered to obstruct or waste time, are also out of order. These include absurd proposals, repetitive motions that have already been rejected, and amendments so trivial they serve no purpose beyond delay. The chair can reject them without debate. Drawing the line between obstruction and legitimate minority use of the amendment process is a judgment call, which is one of the places an experienced presiding officer makes a visible difference.
An amendment that merely negates the main motion is likewise improper. If the main motion proposes spending $5,000, an amendment changing the figure to $0 kills the motion without a direct up-or-down vote. The correct move is to vote against the main motion, or to move to postpone it indefinitely.
Scope of Notice for Bylaw Amendments
Amending bylaws works under stricter rules than amending an ordinary motion on the floor. Most organizations require advance written notice, and the notice sets a ceiling on what the meeting can actually do.
When previous notice is required, no amendment proposed at the meeting may make a change greater than what the notice described. An amendment that exceeds the scope of notice is out of order, because members who skipped the meeting relied on the notice to understand what was at stake. An organization that ignores this limit risks having the amendment challenged and invalidated afterward.
There is one exception. When a properly authorized committee brings forward a complete revision of the bylaws, the document is open to amendment as freely as if the organization were adopting bylaws from scratch. The notice itself has told members that an entirely new document is on the table, so the scope-of-notice limit does not apply.
Bylaw amendments typically require a supermajority, often two-thirds of those voting, though the exact threshold is whatever the existing bylaws specify. Amendments to articles of incorporation generally require filing with the state as well, and skipping that filing can leave the amendment’s legal effect in doubt.
Getting an Amendment Properly Before the Body
Even an amendment that satisfies every substantive rule can be ruled out of order if it is not proposed correctly. The member must be recognized by the chair and then state the amendment in specific terms: “I move to amend the motion by inserting the words…” or “I move to amend by striking the phrase…” A vague suggestion is not a motion. The language has to be precise enough that every member knows exactly what they would be voting on.
The amendment then needs a second from another member before the chair opens it to debate. Once seconded, discussion is on the amendment, not the broader main motion. A majority adopts it. If it fails, the main motion stands in its original form, and a different amendment can still be offered.
The standard forms are insertion or addition, striking out, striking out and inserting, and substitution of an entire motion or amendment.4U.S. Government Publishing Office. House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House – Chapter 3. Amendments A motion to strike out and insert is not divisible; the assembly votes on the striking and the inserting together as one question.
A Note on Friendly Amendments
A “friendly amendment” is an informal label for a change the original mover supports. Members sometimes treat these as adopted the moment the mover agrees. That shortcut is wrong. Under Robert’s Rules, a friendly amendment is procedurally identical to any other amendment, and the assembly must consent, either by majority vote or by unanimous consent.5Robert’s Rules of Order. Frequently Asked Questions If the chair asks whether there is any objection and no one objects, the amendment is adopted by unanimous consent. If a single member objects, it goes through the normal process regardless of whether the mover approves. The mover has no authority to accept amendments on behalf of the body, and a chair who lets one slide through without checking for objection is building a record that can be challenged later.