Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Reviving the US Equal Rights Amendment

  1. Top | #31
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    5,930
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    6,302
    Rep Power
    60
    Instead of reviving a stale proposed amendment which, by its own terms, has expired, why not propose a new amendment with clear and concise language as to its purpose?

  2. Top | #32
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    8,345
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    25,174
    Rep Power
    82
    House Votes To Push Deadline On Equal Rights Amendment : NPR
    The proposed amendment says simply, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex," and it has had a renaissance in recent years, with three states ratifying it since 2017.

    However, the bill may well be stymied after this vote.

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said earlier this month that he's "personally not a supporter" of the amendment, and the Trump administration's Office of Legal Counsel has said that it considers the ERA "expired."
    Since all the Senate Republicans seem to have delegated their voting to MMC, it's stuck. There are also questions about how valid this action is.

    Republicans argued against the bill, saying that the amendment is unconstitutional, but they also particularly stressed the issue of abortion in their arguments.
    They seem rather desperate.

    This is the three-state strategy, ratifying the ERA in 3 more states and then tweaking the amendment in Congress. The state part is done, in Illinois, Nevada, and Virginia, and the Congress part is partially done.

    An alternative is starting from scratch, introducing a new ERA, but that would be time-consuming. Rep. Carolyn Maloney has repeatedly done that, without much success.

    H.J.Res.79 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
    Final Vote Results for Roll Call 70 - the vote on HJRes 79
    All 227 Democrats present voted for it. Of the 187 Republicans present, 5 voted for it. The lone Independent voted against it.
    It passes 232 - 183

  3. Top | #33
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    26,111
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,584
    Rep Power
    100
    This isn't getting onto the Constitution. It has been too long and will likely drag out into the Supreme Court if it manages past Congress.

  4. Top | #34
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    3,422
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    6,333
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    House Votes To Push Deadline On Equal Rights Amendment : NPR
    The proposed amendment says simply, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex," and it has had a renaissance in recent years, with three states ratifying it since 2017.

    However, the bill may well be stymied after this vote.

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said earlier this month that he's "personally not a supporter" of the amendment, and the Trump administration's Office of Legal Counsel has said that it considers the ERA "expired."
    Since all the Senate Republicans seem to have delegated their voting to MMC, it's stuck. There are also questions about how valid this action is.

    Republicans argued against the bill, saying that the amendment is unconstitutional, but they also particularly stressed the issue of abortion in their arguments.
    They seem rather desperate.

    This is the three-state strategy, ratifying the ERA in 3 more states and then tweaking the amendment in Congress. The state part is done, in Illinois, Nevada, and Virginia, and the Congress part is partially done.

    An alternative is starting from scratch, introducing a new ERA, but that would be time-consuming. Rep. Carolyn Maloney has repeatedly done that, without much success.

    H.J.Res.79 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
    Final Vote Results for Roll Call 70 - the vote on HJRes 79
    All 227 Democrats present voted for it. Of the 187 Republicans present, 5 voted for it. The lone Independent voted against it.
    It passes 232 - 183
    The real question is how an amendment to the Constitution can ever be anything but constitutional. Or for that matter how constitutionality factors into it at all. An amendment amends the Constitution. After passage, it is automatically constitutional. Before passage, the only constitutional consideration is the process, not the content.

  5. Top | #35
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    26,111
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,584
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    House Votes To Push Deadline On Equal Rights Amendment : NPR

    Since all the Senate Republicans seem to have delegated their voting to MMC, it's stuck. There are also questions about how valid this action is.


    They seem rather desperate.

    This is the three-state strategy, ratifying the ERA in 3 more states and then tweaking the amendment in Congress. The state part is done, in Illinois, Nevada, and Virginia, and the Congress part is partially done.

    An alternative is starting from scratch, introducing a new ERA, but that would be time-consuming. Rep. Carolyn Maloney has repeatedly done that, without much success.

    H.J.Res.79 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
    Final Vote Results for Roll Call 70 - the vote on HJRes 79
    All 227 Democrats present voted for it. Of the 187 Republicans present, 5 voted for it. The lone Independent voted against it.
    It passes 232 - 183
    The real question is how an amendment to the Constitution can ever be anything but constitutional. Or for that matter how constitutionality factors into it at all. An amendment amends the Constitution. After passage, it is automatically constitutional. Before passage, the only constitutional consideration is the process, not the content.
    There is the amendment process itself that is part of the Constitution.

  6. Top | #36
    Cyborg with a Tiara
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Recluse
    Posts
    8,615
    Archived
    9,040
    Total Posts
    17,655
    Rep Power
    85
    Staff Notice
    X Gender identity posts moved to elsewhere
    Moved

Similar Threads

  1. Office of Civil Rights to Suppress Rights to Legal Medical Care
    By Copernicus in forum Separation of Church & State
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-22-2018, 10:21 PM
  2. WI court: 4th amendment? What 4th amendment?
    By Underseer in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 03-04-2016, 01:36 AM
  3. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-20-2015, 03:09 AM
  4. Does the 14th Amendment have a comma issue like the 2nd Amendment?
    By repoman in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-30-2015, 01:03 AM
  5. Equal marriage means less sex
    By hinduwoman in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-07-2014, 02:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •