Skip to comments.Nevada ratifies Equal Rights Amendment decades past deadline
Posted on 03/22/2017 4:33:19 PM PDT by Repeal 16-17
CARSON CITY, Nev. - Nevada lawmakers are ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment exactly 45 years after Congress first submitted it to the states. State senators gave final approval Wednesday for Nevada to sign on to the effort set in motion by women's suffragists.
The move brings the nation two states shy -- but decades past deadline -- of amending the U.S. Constitution to plainly state women and men are equal under the law. Opponents argue it could disrupt family and military culture, and possibly lead to unfettered abortion access and funding.
The amendment required approval from 38 states to take effect. Thirty-five states ratified it by 1977. No others joined in by a 1982 cutoff date. Nine state legislatures later reconsidered the amendment. Nevada is the first to approve it after the deadline.
Now Liberals argue that the time limit never meant anything and so feminism can still be stamped into the Constitution. Because, after all, rules are only for Conservatives and Republicans.
A few states rescinded their ratifications of the ERA. And the deadline is long passed anyway. Did Nevada just do this as a symbolic action?
Now, repeal the 19th amendment..../S
I remember way back then, if it passed, everyone said you would have men in women’s bathrooms. Ha ha, like that would ever be allowed.
Correction, rules are there for liberals to punish conservatives.
When Nevada's Secretary of State submits the ratification letter to the Archivist of the United States, the Archivist will return the Letter of Ratification along with a memorandum explaining that the deadline passed in 1979 and that the ratification therefore is null and void.
By the way, the federal courts killed the extension from 1979 to 1982 on the grounds that the extension was attempted using normal legislation (majority vote & presidential signature) and not the amendatory process (two thirds vote of both Houses).
To use an expression from "Star Trek," "It's dead, Jim."
Post #6. It’s just political posturing.
One of the problems with the ERA was that there could be no women’s athletic teams if the U.S. remained true to the wording. Women would be allowed to try out for the basketball team, for example, but few would ever make the team.
Fast forward to today. Anyone who supports separate athletic teams for males and females and also supports this transgender nonsense is a huge hypocrite.
It’s called virtue signalling, the left loves it.
Feminists cooled their jets when they realized that women couldn’t simultaneously have their protected status with things like the draft and preferential hiring.
“I remember way back then, if it passed, everyone said you would have men in womens bathrooms. Ha ha, like that would ever be allowed.”
Yes, I remember that, too. People were joking that some transvestite man would be granted the “right” to take a shower with highschool girls after gym class. Of course, that was ridiculous. Of course, now we know that no one even on the far left would ever be crazy enough or indecent enough to propose such a thing. Ha, ha, ha.
That horse has left the barn.
The Dredd Scott Decision was ruled constitutional in 1857.
The Court will not revisit this issue. It’s settled law.
Hawke v. Smith (1920) dealt a ratification could be rescinded via a referendum. The Supreme Court said no.
The cases dealing with Congress's power to put time limits on proposed amendments are Dillon v. Gloss (1921) and Coleman v. Miller (1939), the latter ruling that whether a time limit would be imposed was solely up to Congress to decide (Dillon had suggested that the courts could do so if Congress did not).
Repeal the 17th. Senators elected by State Legislature was part of ‘the Great Compromise.” 17th destroyed this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.