Activists Seek to Resuscitate 1972 Equal Rights Amendment

A coalition of feminists and transgender groups are asking Congress to revive the two-dead Equal Rights Amendment, (ERA).

The 1972 amendment was first introduced. It was not ratified within the seven-year period that Congress had given for it.

Even after Congress extended the time limit for three more years by simple majority vote, it failed to pass again.

35 states ratified it over the first seven year, but five of them withdrew before the deadline expired.

Between 1977, when Indiana ratified ERA, and 1977 when another state did so in the same year, it was forty years.

The Eagle Forum’s president, Kris Ullman, stated that the Eagle Forum is a national pro family advocacy group. He said that the Eagle Forum has never accepted the validity of the five rescissions.

“Since Indiana’s ratification, which fell within the legal time limit, no state ratified the ERA until the Nevada state legislature did so in 2017, 40 years later,” Ullman.

The ‘Three State Strategy’

Nevada’s ratification was only the first step in what would become known as the “Three State Strategy,” A plan was adopted by ERA promoters in order to add three more states to the 35 ratifications that they claim are still valid. This would bring the total to 38 for the amendment.

In 2018, Illinois ratified ERA, followed by Virginia in 2020. This sets the stage for a fight in Congress.

Today, advocates say all that stands in the way of the ERA from becoming the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution is a vote by Congress.

“They want Congress to disavow the 1982 expiration date, recognize that the required 38 states have now ratified the amendment, and declare ERA the law of the land,” Ullman.

The following is the text of the 1972 amendment that Congress approved:

“Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

Gender Identity and Sexual orientation can be added

Ullman claims that pro-trans and anti-abortion groups support the ERA the most.

“In my opinion, they want to use the ERA to insert gender identity and sexual orientation into the Constitution and use it to strike down all restrictions on abortion,” She spoke.

The existence of the ERA is threatened by the adoption of the ERA. “female-only spaces.” Ullman believes it could eliminate single-sex domestic violence shelters for women, single-sex prisons and schools, as well as single-sex sports facilities.

“I’m also concerned about the possible elimination of the military draft exemption for women,” She spoke.

Other arguments that are often made against the ERA include the possibility of adverse effects on women’s life and social insurance rates, their access to certain programs for assistance with domestic violence, the law governing accommodations for pregnant women at the workplace, as well as the state labor laws protecting women who do heavy work.

Raucous Senate Hearing

Jan. 24 saw the introduction by Sens. of Senate Joint Resolution 4. This was the first step in the latest effort to adopt the ERA. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) Lisa Murkowski (R. Alaska)

On February 28, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard the resolution.

Ullman, a witness at the hearing, stated to The Epoch Times, that several Democrats on that committee opened proceedings by asserting that women living in the United States are subject to discrimination.

Representatives from several groups demanded that the amendment be immediately ratified by Congress.

“When opponents of the resurrected ERA tried to testify, some in the audience became so disruptive that three unruly protesters were removed from the room by security while shouting ‘Women are dying!'” Ullman.

LGBT Leaders weigh in

Among the main supporters of the ERA is LGBT activists. They express concern that they will lose many of the rights they have recently won through social media posts.

One LGBT post online stated that the ERA is necessary to provide equal access. “a wider tent of constitutional protection.”

Other ERA promoters worry that the Fifth Amendment’s right to equal protection does not extend far enough, and the many state civil rights laws that protect women’s rights in the United States are weak and vulnerable.

Changes in Definitions

“The word ‘sex’ today has many different definitions and connotations than it had in the 1970s,” Anne Cori, chairwoman of the Eagle Forum.

Ullman stated that the goal of the political left was to redefine the meaning of the word “sex” means.

“I do not trust people who cannot even define the word ‘woman’ to determine that,” She spoke.

Cori, Cori’s daughter, was interviewed by The Epoch Times about her father, Phyliss Schlafly (late conservative activist, ERA nemesis). “The ERA would make illegal any kind of distinctions on the basis of sex. It cuts across every aspect of the law and makes everything sex neutral.

“The ERA makes males as well as females interchangeable in all areas of life. Everyone knows that there are fundamental biological differences among men and women. It is foolish to assume they can be interchanged.

“We don’t want it,” She spoke. “We must prevent the government from forcing it down our throats.”

It will Pass!

Ullman stated to The Epoch Times that she believes the ERA promoters won’t get 15 Republican senators together with 51 Democrats to pass Senate Joint Resolution 4 without the two-thirds majority required for adoption.

“It’s clear they don’t have the votes,” Cori said. “If they did, it would have been passed already.”

Ullman stated that she is certain that the losing side will appeal to the Supreme Court.

It could prove to be a daunting task for ERA supporters, because it was announced on the day of the hearing that a federal appels court had just upheld a previous federal court ruling that stated that there were no deadlines for ratification. “expired long ago.”