Biden Ratifies Equal Rights Amendment, Sparking Legal Battle

On March 22nd, 2021, President Biden signed a resolution ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), a landmark piece of legislation that has been debated for nearly 50 years. The ERA, simply states that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex,” and its ratification has been a major goal of feminist and women’s rights organizations for decades.

However, the ratification of the ERA has sparked a legal battle as several states are challenging its validity. The main argument against the ERA is that the ratification process was not completed within the seven-year time limit set by Congress. The amendment was first passed by Congress in 1972, and by 1979, 35 states had ratified it. However, five states later rescinded their ratification, and the ERA fell three states short of the required 38 ratifications.

Proponents of the ERA argue that the time limit set by Congress was arbitrary and that the amendment should be ratified even though it was not completed within that time frame. They point to the fact that the Constitution does not set a time limit for the ratification of amendments and that other amendments have been ratified long after they were first proposed.

Opponents of the ERA argue that the time limit was set for a reason and that it is important to follow the rules set by Congress. They also argue that the ERA is no longer relevant and that it would be a mistake to ratify it now.

Arguments for the ERA

There are several arguments in favor of ratifying the ERA. First, the ERA would ensure that women are treated equally under the law. This would mean that women would have the same rights as men in all areas of life, including employment, education, and housing.

Second, the ERA would help to close the gender pay gap. Women currently earn less than men for the same work, and the ERA would help to ensure that women are paid fairly.

Third, the ERA would help to protect women from discrimination. Women are often discriminated against in the workplace, in the housing market, and in the justice system. The ERA would help to ensure that women are treated fairly and that they have the same opportunities as men.

Arguments against the ERA

There are also several arguments against ratifying the ERA. First, some people argue that the ERA is unnecessary because women already have equal rights under the law. They point to the fact that women have the right to vote, the right to work, and the right to own property.

Second, some people argue that the ERA would lead to unintended consequences. For example, they argue that the ERA could be used to justify abortion on demand or same-sex marriage.

Third, some people argue that the ERA is simply not necessary. They believe that the Constitution already protects women from discrimination and that the ERA would be redundant.

Conclusion

The ratification of the ERA is a complex and controversial issue. There are strong arguments on both sides of the debate. Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to ratify the ERA will be up to the Supreme Court.