As the #MeToo movement has shown, even in the 21st century, women still often have second-place status. While courts have interpreted some parts of the constitution to require equal protection of the law, these protections are not as strong as protections bases on race and national origin, words explicitly mentioned in our Constitution. Of the 35 states that ratified the ERA before the deadline, four voted to rescind their ratifications.įull text of the resolution is available here.It is a little known fact that the Constitution does not explicitly require equal rights for women. Prohibiting religious organizations from having single-sex membership.Requiring doctors to provide puberty blockers to children who claim to identify as transgender.Requiring public funding for sex-reassignment surgeries based on the argument that denying coverage would constitute sex discrimination.Requiring women to register for the draft.Prohibiting separate public restrooms for males and females.Prohibiting separate prisons for male and female prisoners.
Prohibiting schools from allowing separate-sex athletic teams.The potential ramifications of ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment include: In order for the ERA to be ratified in a legitimate manner, the process must follow Article V of the Constitution, which requires a re-introduction of the amendment with the same or modified language in addition to being approved by two-thirds of both the House and Senate.Congress does not have the authority to change a resolution that proposes a constitutional amendment after it is submitted to the states or after the deadline is reached.The ERA was not ratified to the Constitution because the deadline passed without having the necessary support from three-fourths of states.The role that Congress had in the constitutional amendment process for the ERA concluded once the amendment was submitted to the states.(R-La.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and John Boozman (R-Ark.) also cosponsored the resolution. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), J.D. Beyond the illegitimacy of trying to resurrect the ERA, we cannot ignore the very serious effects adding the ERA to our Constitution today would have on abortion, religious liberty, protections for women, and more,” said Hyde-Smith. Congress has no authority to go back in time to revive a failed constitutional amendment, which makes the current push to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment wrong on its face. “The law and the facts outlined in this resolution are clear. This resolution makes clear what most of us already know: The deadline for states to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment has long passed and was rightfully rejected,” said Kennedy. Nor can they replace a deadline that passed long ago. This attempt is legally and morally wrong and would unleash a Pandora’s box of harmful legal implications. “Radical lawmakers cannot erase women or their rights from our Constitution. The ERA Resolution is a check against an illegitimate effort, S.J.Res.4, that attempts undo the deadline that Congress set in 1972, when the amendment was sent to the states for ratification. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) in introducing the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) Resolution to recognize that Congress does not have the authority to deem the ERA as a ratified amendment to the Constitution.
0 kommentar(er)
