Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

orleans

(35,261 posts)
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 10:24 PM Dec 4

"46 Senators Call on Biden to Certify Equal Rights Amendment as GOP Control Looms "There is no excuse for leaving us all

46 Senators Call on Biden to Certify Equal Rights Amendment as GOP Control Looms
"There is no excuse for leaving us all unprotected," said one advocate.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/era-equal-rights-amendment



snip

Despite the amendment meeting the ratification requirements, Biden has yet to direct the national archivist, Colleen Shogan, to certify the ERA and publish it in the Federal Register, which would formally cement it as part of the U.S. Constitution.

Once published, the amendment would guarantee legal equality between men and women, and reproductive rights advocates have said it could be invoked by judges to overturn anti-abortion rights laws that have been passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country—an urgent issue as President-elect Donald Trump's second term in office with a GOP-controlled Congress draws near.

"As you are keenly aware," wrote the senators, "after nearly 50 years under the protections of Roe, more than half of all Americans have seen their rights come under attack, with access to abortion care and lifesaving healthcare varying from state to state. A federal solution is needed, and the ERA is the strongest tool to ensure equality and protect these rights for everyone. It would establish the premise that sex-based distinctions in access to reproductive care are unconstitutional, and therefore that abortion bans—which single out women for unfair denial of medical treatment based on sex—violate a constitutional right to sex equality."

snip

Kati Hornung, co-founder of Vote Equality U.S. and a leader in the grassroots effort that pushed Virginia to ratify the ERA, told Style Weekly that Biden "campaigned on fixing our constitutional gender equality gap and his campaign even requested to speak at a VAratifyERA event in 2019."

"He is running out of time to tell the national archivist, Colleen Shogan, to do her job," she said. "One hundred seventy million women and girls have been waiting 101 years for this amendment to be added and with the increased threats to our LGBTQIA+ family and friends, there is no excuse for leaving us all unprotected."



bold is mine

44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"46 Senators Call on Biden to Certify Equal Rights Amendment as GOP Control Looms "There is no excuse for leaving us all (Original Post) orleans Dec 4 OP
Wow, that is an excellent idea. I hadn't heard about that. That would cement his legacy. walkingman Dec 4 #1
great idea rich7862 Dec 4 #2
K&R Docreed2003 Dec 4 #3
What is the hold up. onecaliberal Dec 4 #4
It expired in 1982 Polybius Dec 5 #22
I did not know this. And yes, we are out of time. Hekate Dec 4 #5
DURec leftstreet Dec 4 #6
It's not that simple. There was a time limit and since then, 5 states have rescinded their votes MichMan Dec 4 #7
It would clearly H2O Man Dec 4 #8
That's a heckuva speculation BWdem4life Dec 4 #9
Fair question. H2O Man Dec 4 #11
It might be 9-0, and rightfully so Polybius Dec 5 #23
There will be NO chance it goes through the net if he DOESN'T take the shot. Beartracks Dec 5 #42
It was written with an expiration date Polybius Dec 5 #20
According to the Brennan Center there is precedent for the SC leaving it to Congress Quiet Em Dec 4 #12
They can "leave it to Congress" and still kill it FBaggins Dec 5 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author usonian Dec 4 #10
K & R SunSeeker Dec 4 #13
Go Out With A Bang President Biden. DO IT. DallasNE Dec 4 #14
I think Biden should just 'do it'. It either sticks or it does not. mackdaddy Dec 4 #15
K&R spanone Dec 5 #16
Since losing the election Biden should have been everything he could possibly do to protect eh American patricia92243 Dec 5 #17
It would be challenged in the MAGA SCOTUS Fiendish Thingy Dec 5 #18
i would think those 46 senators would know if there was a sunset date. and from what i've been reading tonight, it orleans Dec 5 #19
The time for removing the expiration date was 1982 Polybius Dec 5 #24
Not only that, that term of Congress has passed MichMan Dec 5 #27
A resolution is not a law. Nt Fiendish Thingy Dec 5 #28
Yeah, that's not gonna work Polybius Dec 5 #21
Make it so BoRaGard Dec 5 #25
100 years overdue lindysalsagal Dec 5 #29
This message was self-deleted by its author lindysalsagal Dec 5 #30
Biden pardoned his boy, this would "pardon" the rest of us, YES please NotHardly Dec 5 #31
Absolutely none, Joe. republianmushroom Dec 5 #32
Dumb question here. I don't get it. What's happening here ? If it was ratified by the required number of states why Pepsidog Dec 5 #33
I thought the deadline passed. I Buttoneer Dec 5 #34
Here is what Democratic Senators say about it, Quiet Em Dec 5 #35
Every amendment that has passed since prohibition had had a time limit imposed by Congress. n/t MichMan Dec 5 #39
The Supreme Court would have to overturn a previous decision allowing Congress to set a ratification deadline. LudwigPastorius Dec 5 #41
Senators Gillibrand, Schumer, Heinrich, Merkley, Quiet Em Dec 5 #36
Biden cannot do it. only the Archivist can do it. However, soldierant Dec 5 #37
Waaaay overdue. Please do it. Evolve Dammit Dec 5 #38
Come on Joe proud patriot Dec 5 #40
Randi Rhodes has been discussing this proud patriot Dec 6 #43
The "time limit" of seven years was always bullshit. So were states trying to "rescind" their ratifications of ERA. valleyrogue Dec 6 #44

MichMan

(13,557 posts)
7. It's not that simple. There was a time limit and since then, 5 states have rescinded their votes
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 10:55 PM
Dec 4
However, the version of the ERA that Congress passed included, in its preamble, an arbitrary seven-year time limit for ratification. While time limits have become common in proposed amendments since Prohibition, the ERA’s time limit was importantly not included in the text of the version that all states voted to ratify. This distinction is one element of today’s legal and political challenges to the ERA. While there are scholars who disagree, many pro-equality advocates claim that time limits on the ratification process are inherently unconstitutional, as they are not included in Article 5, and thus, the founders chose not to limit the length of the ratification period.

One year following the ERA’s passage in Congress, 30 states had ratified it. However, momentum slowed as the anti-ERA movement ramped up in the latter part of the decade. After nationwide mobilization of hundreds of thousands of voters, Congress voted by simple majority to extend the original seven-year deadline by three years in 1978. However, the three-year limit did not allow sufficient time to oust key anti-ERA state senators because Senate terms in most states were at least four years. So, in 1982, the ERA fell three states short of ratification. Failure to reach the necessary 38 states in the 1970s was due to an anti-ERA campaign that dealt a significant blow to the amendment’s bipartisan nature.


https://www.americanprogress.org/article/what-comes-next-for-the-equal-rights-amendment/

The fact that congress included a seven year time limit and the amendment passed by the states didn't, would appear to be a major point of contention, and not a slam dunk.

Many legal scholars say the states can't rescind, many other say they can. Many say the deadline doesn't matter, many say it does. The SC would undoubtably have to listen to the dueling legal scholars about both the deadline and the validity of state withdrawals and make a ruling.

H2O Man

(75,779 posts)
8. It would clearly
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 11:11 PM
Dec 4

go to the USSC to determine if those states could rescind their vote. The Constitution does not address that. I will speculate that the current USSC would rule in a manner that we would want.

BWdem4life

(2,502 posts)
9. That's a heckuva speculation
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 11:20 PM
Dec 4

All things considered. But is there anything to lose by trying?

Beartracks

(13,618 posts)
42. There will be NO chance it goes through the net if he DOESN'T take the shot.
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 10:25 PM
Dec 5


=================

Quiet Em

(1,184 posts)
12. According to the Brennan Center there is precedent for the SC leaving it to Congress
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 11:31 PM
Dec 4
But would the courts have a say in this controversy? In a 1939 case, the Supreme Court ruled that the question of whether an amendment has been ratified in a reasonable period of time is a “political question” best left in the hands of Congress, not the courts. If Congress acts to waive the deadline, would the courts continue to honor that precedent?


https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/equal-rights-amendment-explained

In my opinion this needs to be done. Women are dying. Of course some Republican creep(s) will try to fight it. I say bring it on. It's way overdue and the public is on our side.

FBaggins

(27,802 posts)
26. They can "leave it to Congress" and still kill it
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 06:42 AM
Dec 5

They just leave it to the Congress that set a ratification deadline and then extended it to 1982… and/ir the congresses that have rejected resolutions to consider it ratified.

Allowing the president to declare it ratified by fiat is not “leaving it in the hands of Congress”

Response to orleans (Original post)

DallasNE

(7,589 posts)
14. Go Out With A Bang President Biden. DO IT.
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 11:52 PM
Dec 4

Sure, it will be challenged in the courts but that should resolve some of the unanswered questions. The two big ones being can a State ratify and then de-ratify? Is there a time limit for ratification and if so, what is it?

mackdaddy

(1,618 posts)
15. I think Biden should just 'do it'. It either sticks or it does not.
Wed Dec 4, 2024, 11:54 PM
Dec 4

Let the SC and Republicans try to un-wind it and explain why women should not have equal rights.

patricia92243

(12,873 posts)
17. Since losing the election Biden should have been everything he could possibly do to protect eh American
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 12:37 AM
Dec 5

public. At least do as much as he can NOW.

Fiendish Thingy

(18,811 posts)
18. It would be challenged in the MAGA SCOTUS
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 01:15 AM
Dec 5

The ERA had a sunset date of many years ago, which allegedly erases all the prior state ratifications. The final needed ratifications came after the sunset date.

That is likely the reason Biden hasn’t directed the archive to act- he’s probably been advised it would be challenged and overturned in court.

orleans

(35,261 posts)
19. i would think those 46 senators would know if there was a sunset date. and from what i've been reading tonight, it
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 01:53 AM
Dec 5

doesn't necessarily have that time limit



REMOVING THE TIME LIMIT
When the 117th U.S. Congress convened in full for the first time on Thursday, January 21, 2021 resolutions with bipartisan support were introduced to remove the time limit placed upon the Equal Rights Amendment in 1972.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to remove the time limit with a vote of 222-204 on HJ Res 17. Attention now turns to the U.S. Senate and moving SJ Res 1 to the floor for a vote.

https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/


Polybius

(18,365 posts)
24. The time for removing the expiration date was 1982
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 02:22 AM
Dec 5

You can't just remove an expiration date after it expires. The 2021 congressional vote overstepped their boundaries.

MichMan

(13,557 posts)
27. Not only that, that term of Congress has passed
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 09:52 AM
Dec 5

You can't pass a resolution in the House in one congressional term (117th) , and then pass it in the Senate years later under a new congress (118th).

Response to orleans (Original post)

republianmushroom

(18,179 posts)
32. Absolutely none, Joe.
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 02:40 PM
Dec 5

... certify the ERA and publish it in the Federal Register, which would formally cement it as part of the U.S. Constitution. Do it 'NOW', Joe.

Pepsidog

(6,317 posts)
33. Dumb question here. I don't get it. What's happening here ? If it was ratified by the required number of states why
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 03:10 PM
Dec 5

didn't it become an amendment ? And if the answer is it has to be certified and put in the Fed Register why wasn’t it done by past Dem Presidents. Please explain.

Buttoneer

(695 posts)
34. I thought the deadline passed. I
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 04:21 PM
Dec 5

asked the same question a few days ago because I kept seeing ads calling for the ERA to be recognized by Biden.


https://democraticunderground.com/100219778107

Quiet Em

(1,184 posts)
35. Here is what Democratic Senators say about it,
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:33 PM
Dec 5
But Article V of the Constitution does not
impose a time limit for ratification of a proposed amendment, nor does it give Congress the
power to do so.


The full letter is at this link.

https://styleweekly.wppcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/PastedGraphic-1.pdf

MichMan

(13,557 posts)
39. Every amendment that has passed since prohibition had had a time limit imposed by Congress. n/t
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 09:15 PM
Dec 5

LudwigPastorius

(11,079 posts)
41. The Supreme Court would have to overturn a previous decision allowing Congress to set a ratification deadline.
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 10:07 PM
Dec 5
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep256/usrep256368/usrep256368.pdf

It's worth a shot, but I don't think the Trump court is going to change this precedent.

Quiet Em

(1,184 posts)
36. Senators Gillibrand, Schumer, Heinrich, Merkley,
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 06:09 PM
Dec 5

Shaheen, Van Hollen, Lujan, Kaine, Welch, Wyden, Booker, Kelly, Butler, Schatz, Cardin, Blumenthal, Cortez Masto, Helmy, Padilla, Sanders, Warren, Baldwin, Hirono, Stabenow, Tester, Cantwell, Durbin, Duckworth, Peters, Rosen, Warner, Casey, Markey, Whitehouse, Murray, Ossoff, Klobuchar, Coons, Warnock, Reed, Murphy, Carper, King, Brown, Hassan, and Hickenlooper.

Thank you. Let's get it done.

soldierant

(8,003 posts)
37. Biden cannot do it. only the Archivist can do it. However,
Thu Dec 5, 2024, 06:57 PM
Dec 5

what Biden could do is send the Archivist a letter stating that the Amendment has been ratified and listing the states which have voted for ir.

No, IANAL, but I got that from a pretty good one = Robert Hubbell on Substack.

proud patriot

(101,208 posts)
43. Randi Rhodes has been discussing this
Fri Dec 6, 2024, 06:25 PM
Dec 6

all Joe has to do is send the archivist a letter requesting it .

valleyrogue

(1,191 posts)
44. The "time limit" of seven years was always bullshit. So were states trying to "rescind" their ratifications of ERA.
Fri Dec 6, 2024, 06:39 PM
Dec 6

Besides, the date had been extended from 1979 to 1982 and for some bizarre reason wasn't extended further.

Just put get the ERA in the Constitution, period.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"46 Senators Call on Bide...