Reviving the US Equal Rights Amendment

[lpetrich]

An alternative resolution from a House Democrat:
H.J.Res.82 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Expressing the sense of Congress that the article of amendment commonly known as the "Equal Rights Amendment" has been validly ratified and is enforceable as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the Archivist of the United States must certify and publish the Equal Rights Amendment as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment without delay. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress - Rep. Bush, Cori [D-MO-1] (Introduced 07/14/2023)
54 cosponsors, all original, all Democrats

A rival resolutiony from a Senate Republican:
S.Res.107 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): A resolution recognizing the expiration of the Equal Rights Amendment proposed by Congress in March 1972, and observing that Congress has no authority to modify a resolution proposing a constitutional amendment after the amendment has been submitted to the States or after the amendment has expired. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
20 cosponsors, 11 original, all Republicans

Democrats Try a Novel Tactic to Revive the Equal Rights Amendment - The New York Times - "Proponents of the measure to enshrine a guarantee of sex equality into the Constitution are using a creative legal theory to try to resurrect the long-stalled amendment."

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Representative Cori Bush of Missouri introduced a joint resolution on Thursday stating that the measure has already been ratified and is enforceable as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. The resolution states that the national archivist, who is responsible for the certification and publication of constitutional amendments, must immediately do so.

...
“This is a political rather than a legal struggle,” said Laurence Tribe, the constitutional scholar and professor emeritus at Harvard Law School. “It would succeed only in a different environment than we have. It’s not going to pass. The real question is what political message is being sent. In a political environment like this, you throw at the wall whatever you can.”

 

[lpetrich]

Instead of removing an expired deadline, they are now trying to claim that it's already ratified.

“This is an opportunity to start fresh with a legitimate legal theory that has basis in constitutional law,” Ms. Gillibrand said, noting that the reference to the deadline was in the preamble, not the text of the amendment itself. “I believe President Biden can just do this. I’m going to make the legal and political argument over the next several months that this is something he can do.”

“If we acknowledge an unconstitutional deadline, a litany of other procedural hurdles will follow,” Ms. Bush, a founder of the E.R.A. caucus in the House, said at a news conference on Thursday, explaining the strategy. “We can’t let paperwork keep us out of the U.S. Constitution.”

Yes, that's what she said, "paperwork".

Russ Feingold, the former Wisconsin senator who serves as president of the American Constitution Society, said he supported the Democrats’ new strategy.

“For the institution that actually put this limitation of the deadline on to say, ‘Actually, it doesn’t matter’ really is significant,” Mr. Feingold said. “The White House and members of Congress are beginning to see that credible legal scholars are saying this is already part of the Constitution.”

Some opponents of the ERA claim that it could be used to support abortion.

Ms. Gillibrand conceded that she did not think Republicans would ever support the amendment, “largely because the pro-life movement has co-opted this argument,” she said. She said her hope was to compel Mr. Biden to call on the archivist to take action, or to change the filibuster rules in the Senate so that civil rights measures like the amendment would need only a simple majority — not 60 votes — to move forward.