BY MIKE MAGEE
Believe it or not, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was introduced for the first time 100 years ago in 1923. But that was just passed by the National Assembly with a two-thirds majority 49 years later in 1972. It was simply step 1 in the world’s most complicated and difficult national constitutional amendment process.
Step 2, approved by three-quarters of the states, is unlikely to succeed. a running start with 28 of the 38 states required to register that first year. But 1972 was also the year Phyllis Schafly, an outspoken advocate of patriarchy and stay-at-home moms, began echoing her anti-ERA message on Chicago News Radio WBBM. The following year, she went to the country with a CBS Morning News contract, then a gig with CNN from 1980 to 1983.
Corny, yet effective and persistent in her pursuit of culture war issues, she’s a gifted journalist who has leveraged her role of “housewife” for all it deserves. One of her gambles is delivering homemade bread, jams and apple pie to state legislators with the message “Protect us from congressional traffic jams; Vote against ERA spoofing” and “I support mom and apple pie.”
The irony is that she’s been largely “out of the house” as an active conservative political fighter since signing on as a young researcher at American Enterprise Institute 1946and (to date) have waged a three-decade battle to preserve “traditional American values” as a seemingly unregistered national attorney, editor, and speaker. with her rabid fan base.
That idolatry has not completely passed on to the younger generation. In 2008, eight years before she died at the age of 92, her alma mater, Washington University in St. Louis, awarded her an honorary degree at the graduation ceremony. When she stood up to accept the award, one-third of the graduates stood up and turned their backs on her, and three faculty members walked off the stage.
Two decades later, long after many thought ERA was dead and buried, three states added their “yes” vote to what could become the 26th Amendment – Nevada (2017), Illinois (2018) and Virginia (2020). What changed, of course, was the Supreme Court’s arrangement with conservative, theocratic judges, and the Roe v. Wade followed, followed by Dobbs’ decision and (predictably) Red State attack on women’s autonomy and freedom.
So, with step 1 and step 2 now secured, the Equal Rights Amendment, preventing discrimination in motherhood and pregnancy, gender discrimination and violence, inequality in Is it time to pay wages and infringe on women’s freedom to control their own health and reproductive life decisions? Not exactly exactly. It seems that when the ERA won two-thirds of the congressional vote in 1972, Congress wrote a deadline for three-quarters of the states to pass it. That term was seven years (1979). It later expanded that three years to 1982. Also over the years, several states have tried to rescind their approvals. Is that allowed?
Article V, Section 4.2.1 talk about deadlines. The congress.gov The website states: “A prominent question is whether Congress can set a deadline for states to ratify the proposed amendment, either in the text of the proposed amendment or the accompanying joint resolution. . The content of Article V does not specifically address this issue. IN Dillon sues Gloss, The Supreme Court held that the Constitution implicitly authorizes Congress to “fix a certain time limit” for ratifying an amendment…Limited historical practice shows that if Congress does not specify a deadline for ratification, then that amendment is still waiting for the states to wait until the required number is reached. countries that have ratified it. In 1992, the 27th Amendment, which set forth the effective date of the congressional wage increase, became part of the Constitution more than 202 years after it was proposed.
Article V. Section 4.2.2 refers to the effect of state legislatures “changing their mind” and rescinding previous action. The congress.gov The website states: “The Supreme Court dictates whether a state can ratify an amendment after rejecting it—or rescinding an already ratified amendment—are political questions that need to be addressed. Congress resolved. In support of this theory, the Court cited the concurrent passage of a resolution in 1868 by Congress declaring that the Fourteenth Amendment had been ratified. Congress passed this resolution despite the fact that three states had previously rejected the amendment before ratifying it, and two had attempted to rescind their prior ratifications.”
In short, Congress appears to have the power, if it so chooses, to remove the state ratification deadlines and thus add the three mandatory states, and to deny the states’ requests to “rethink” them. want to change their “yes” vote for the ERA Amendment to “no”.
On January 24, 2023, a bipartisan resolution to set aside the ratification period that was put on the ballot. It was defeated 51 to 47. But the state’s recent victories in Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan and Vermont over abortion rights in Midterm elections 2022 assuming this is only round 1.
Round 2 is already underway, as the Red state legislatures fail to heed the warnings from Republican leaders and push for everything from the forced birth of raped teenagers to the D&C. government-approved for mothers who have lost their babies to miscarriages to the reversal of a women’s drug that has long been approved as safe and effective by the FDA.
As Republican Governor of New Hampshire, Chris Sununu. does not frighten ordinary voters, independent voters. generation of young voters. These guys continue to push themselves deeper and deeper into a far-right establishment that doesn’t really identify much of the Republican Party.
Round 3 could deliver a knockdown for the Republican Party in 2024 and leave the ERA standing in the middle of the ring declaring “I am the greatest of all the Amendments!”
Mike Magee MD is a medical historian and author of GREEN CODE: Inside the Medical-Industrial Complex.
