Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 18898
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#51

Post by Suranis »

Wow. :shock:


The difference between the Middle Ages, and the Age of the Internet, is that in the Middle Ages no-one thought the Earth was flat.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 30400
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#52

Post by bob »

Notorial Dissent wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:47 am I think, well know really, that Nadler is absolutely wasting his, and the House's, time. That HRJ will NEVER EVER see the light of day in the current Senate, let alone pass.
That's the point: Passing a bill knowing it'll die in the other chamber is an age-old electioneering gimmick.

Suranis wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 7:33 amWasn't the Sovcits favourite TONA "Real 13th" Amendment junked because it took too long to be ratified?
No. It never was ratified by two-thirds of the states. It came close a few times (when there were fewer states); and there's a sov-cit belief that (at various points) that some states had ("secretly") ratified it and pushed it over the threshold.

Like the ERA, the TONA could still be ratified. But it would now require like dozen states to ratify it.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2
User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 14142
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#53

Post by Notorial Dissent »

bob wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 8:08 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:47 am I think, well know really, that Nadler is absolutely wasting his, and the House's, time. That HRJ will NEVER EVER see the light of day in the current Senate, let alone pass.
That's the point: Passing a bill knowing it'll die in the other chamber is an age-old electioneering gimmick.

Suranis wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 7:33 amWasn't the Sovcits favourite TONA "Real 13th" Amendment junked because it took too long to be ratified?
No. It never was ratified by two-thirds of the states. It came close a few times (when there were fewer states); and there's a sov-cit belief that (at various points) that some states had ("secretly") ratified it and pushed it over the threshold.

Like the ERA, the TONA could still be ratified. But it would now require like dozen states to ratify it.
TONA would require 26 at this late date. Closest it ever got was 1812ish when it was 2-3 off, from then on not a chance as the gap ever widened.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 47064
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#54

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

I think TONA only has 12 ratifying states. If so, wouldn't it need 63 more?


User avatar
Fortinbras
Posts: 2950
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:08 am

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#55

Post by Fortinbras »

Not 63 more states (think about it) but 26. Back in 1814 it would have needed 14 ... 2 more than it had. But by that time, Betsy Patterson, "the Duchess of Baltimore", was no longer married to Jerome Bonaparte and had slipped into obscurity, so the enthusiasm for the TONA had evaporated.


Addie
Posts: 44558
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#56

Post by Addie »

New York Daily News
Equal Rights Amendment, guaranteeing gender equality is one step closer to being ratified

WASHINGTON — More than 47 years after Congress passed a constitutional amendment granting women equal rights, the House took the first step Wednesday to finally make it part of the nation’s founding document.

The House Judiciary Committee voted to extend the time limit to ratify the The Equal Rights Amendment, which first passed in 1972, but fell three states short of the 38 needed to ratify it before a 1982 deadline.

Nevada and Illinois signed on to the amendment in 2017 and 2018 in a new push to win ratification. With the election of a Democratic statehouse in Virginia last week, advocates believe it’s all but a done deal.

"This all but guarantees that Virginia will become the needed 38th state to ratify the ERA soon after the new legislature is sworn in this coming January," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.). "Now, one hundred years after women won the right to vote with the passage of the 19th Amendment, it is time for women’s full equality to be written into the Constitution.
Adding:
Smithsonian Mag: The 96-Year-History of the Equal Rights Amendment


User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 32502
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer
Contact:

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#57

Post by Volkonski »

Virginia Approves the E.R.A., Becoming the 38th State to Back It

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/us/e ... tw-nytimes
Virginia’s decision does not seal the amendment’s addition to the United States Constitution. A deadline for three-quarters, or 38, of the 50 states to approve the E.R.A. expired in 1982, so the future of the measure is uncertain, and experts said the issue would likely be tied up in the courts and in the political sphere for years.

But the symbolism of the action in Virginia was significant after a struggle that had been raised, hard fought and, at times, forgotten over nearly 100 years.

“It’s just another hurdle, another level of that ceiling that’s cracked,” said Daphne Portis, 58, an E.R.A. activist who clutched photos of female leaders — Shirley Chisholm, Bella Abzug and Gloria Steinem — as she watched the debate among lawmakers in Richmond.

:snippity:

In recent years, new efforts emerged to reignite the E.R.A. Slowly, leaders pushed toward the 38-state threshold despite questions about what it would really mean for the amendment’s fate decades after the deadline. In 2017, Nevada became the 36th state to approve the E.R.A., and a year later, Illinois passed it. That left Virginia, a state that failed to pass the E.R.A. last year, considering it again this year, and with a State Legislature newly dominated by Democrats.


Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Addie
Posts: 44558
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#58

Post by Addie »

:clap:


User avatar
bob
Posts: 30400
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#59

Post by bob »

AP: With Virginia’s final ratification, ERA fight advances:
Virginia officially became the critical 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment on Monday, clearing the way for likely court fights over whether the measure can be added to the U.S. Constitution.

State lawmakers made history earlier this month when each chamber of the General Assembly separately approved ratification resolutions. On Monday, the House and Senate took the final procedural step of signing off on each other’s measures.

* * *

Earlier this month, the U.S. Justice Department issued a legal memo concluding that because the deadline has expired, it is too late for states to ratify the ERA. The only option for supporters now is to begin the ratification process all over again in Congress, the department said.

The National Archives, which certifies the ratification of constitutional amendments, said it would abide by that opinion “unless otherwise directed by a final court order.”

ERA supporters argue that because the deadline was included in a preamble of the amendment, it is not legally binding. There’s also a push in Congress to remove the deadline. Many legal scholars expect the issue will likely be resolved in the courts. Another issue that may only be settled through lawsuits is a move by five states to rescind their previous ratification of the amendment.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2
Baidn
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:49 am

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#60

Post by Baidn »

I legitimately do not understand any state wanting to "withdraw" their ratification even if it is a legal possibility, which I find dubious. It shows a tragic misunderstanding of the roles of the branches of government at best and a desire to openly declare their entire state as sexist at worse. I won't overly shame the town by naming it but it puts me in mind of a place here in VA that puts notices all around town stating and I quote "All schools and public buildings will be OPEN the Monday of Martin Luther King Jr day. However all schools and public buildings will be CLOSED the following Tuesday in observation of Lee Jackson day". Essentially going out of their way to declare the whole town racist.


User avatar
bob
Posts: 30400
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#61

Post by bob »

CNN: Ruth Bader Ginsburg says deadline to ratify Equal Rights Amendment has expired: 'I'd like it to start over':
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a long-time supporter of the Equal Rights Amendment, suggested Monday night that the deadline to ratify the measure as a constitutional amendment has expired and that the decades long effort must start anew.

"I would like to see a new beginning," Ginsburg told an audience at Georgetown University Law Center.

"I'd like it to start over," she added.

Ginsburg was responding to a question from the moderator of the event, Judge M. Margaret McKeown of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, who asked whether there would ever be an Equal Rights Amendment on the federal level.

The ERA would ban discrimination on the basis of sex and guarantee equality for women under the Constitution.

Ginsburg's comments seemed to throw cold water on a recent effort by Virginia and other states who argue that after Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the amendment last month, the states had met the threshold necessary to change the Constitution.

Nodding in response to the question about the dispute, Ginsburg said "there is too much controversy about late comers," and she added that Virginia's move came "long after the deadline passed."

* * *

"I hope someday it will be put back in the political hopper, starting over again, collecting the necessary number of states to ratify it, " she said last year at a separate event at Georgetown.
I read Ginsburg's comments are political rather than judicial: Politically, she believes the stronger course would be to start over; I don't she's opining about the legal arguments against post-deadline ratification.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2
User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 47064
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Constitution: Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

#62

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

My daughter's con law professor makes a compelling case against the ERA at this time. In short, it's no longer needed.

https://www.richmond.com/opinion/column ... f4b8e.html


Post Reply

Return to “Courts, Law, and Legal Issues”