The US House of Representatives is expected to vote this
week on whether to remove the ratification deadline for the Equal Rights
Amendment (ERA), which would grant equal rights to all US citizens
regardless of sex.
The ERA was first proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, leader of the National Woman's Party, soon after ratification of the 19th Amendment which gave women - though, in reality, only white women at the time - the right to vote in the US.
It was not until 1972 that Congress approved an updated wording of the proposed amendment by votes of more than two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate.
The ERA reads: "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex", and Congress shall have the power to enforce that right.
The ERA would affect judicial handling of a wide range of claims including matters of workplace discrimination, gender identity, sexual harassment, domestic abuse and reproductive rights.
US courts have dealt inconsistently of sex discrimination and, under the ERA, any laws containing the different treatment of men and women would be subject to strict scrutiny.
The amendment would further serve as a pre-emptive warning to any legislators seeking to write new laws that would treat men and women unequally.
The late conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly campaigned against the ERA in the 1970s, arguing it would deprive women of their special protections and privileges
Opponents argue the ERA would hurt families and strip women of certain privileges, such as separate bathrooms and Social Security benefits for widows, among others.
The Trump administration's Department of Justice issued a legal memo on January 6 arguing the ERA could not be ratified because of the expired deadline.
Others have highlighted that 5 States - Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, Tennessee and South Dakota - have voted to revoke their ratifications of the ERA.
The case is likely to go to the US Supreme Court.
Congress imposed a deadline when it first proposed
the amendment in 1972.
But the deadline expired nearly four decades ago
after only 35 states had agreed to the amendment. Constitutional
amendments must be ratified by at least 38 states.
Democrats in the House now plan to approve a
resolution that would remove the deadline altogether.
The Republican-led
US Senate would have to agree, which is unlikely.
What is the Equal Rights Amendment?
Advocates for gender equality in the US have been pushing for an amendment to the US Constitution that would provide for equal rights between men and women for nearly a century.The ERA was first proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, leader of the National Woman's Party, soon after ratification of the 19th Amendment which gave women - though, in reality, only white women at the time - the right to vote in the US.
It was not until 1972 that Congress approved an updated wording of the proposed amendment by votes of more than two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate.
The ERA reads: "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex", and Congress shall have the power to enforce that right.
What would the ERA do?
The ERA would provide a fundamental legal remedy against gender discrimination for both women and men, according to the Alice Paul Institute, a non-profit group dedicated to ratifying the ERA.The ERA would affect judicial handling of a wide range of claims including matters of workplace discrimination, gender identity, sexual harassment, domestic abuse and reproductive rights.
US courts have dealt inconsistently of sex discrimination and, under the ERA, any laws containing the different treatment of men and women would be subject to strict scrutiny.
The amendment would further serve as a pre-emptive warning to any legislators seeking to write new laws that would treat men and women unequally.
Why are some people against it?
Opposition to the ERA has come from conservatives who argue it would spawn a wide range of unintended lawsuits that would degrade women's status.The late conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly campaigned against the ERA in the 1970s, arguing it would deprive women of their special protections and privileges
Opponents argue the ERA would hurt families and strip women of certain privileges, such as separate bathrooms and Social Security benefits for widows, among others.
The Trump administration's Department of Justice issued a legal memo on January 6 arguing the ERA could not be ratified because of the expired deadline.
Others have highlighted that 5 States - Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, Tennessee and South Dakota - have voted to revoke their ratifications of the ERA.
The case is likely to go to the US Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment