Biden's Equal Rights Amendment Declaration Sparks Legal Battle As Executive Actions Conclude

President Biden's recent declaration of support for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has reignited a decades-old legal battle over the amendment's validity. The ERA, which would guarantee equal rights for all Americans regardless of sex, has been the subject of ongoing debate and litigation since it was first proposed in 1923.

Biden's Executive Actions and the ERA

In his January 2021 executive order, President Biden directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to "review and consider" the legal status of the ERA. The DOJ subsequently issued a legal opinion concluding that the ERA had been validly ratified by the required 38 states and should be recognized as part of the U.S. Constitution.

This opinion has been met with legal challenges from several states that argue that the ERA ratification process was flawed and that the amendment is therefore invalid. These states contend that the ERA's ratification deadline of 1982 had passed before enough states had ratified it, and that the addition of three states after that deadline was not valid.

Legal Arguments and Perspectives

The legal arguments surrounding the ERA's validity are complex and involve multiple perspectives.

Proponents of the ERA argue that the Constitution does not set a specific deadline for ratification and that the ERA has been validly ratified by the required number of states. They contend that the three states that ratified the ERA after the 1982 deadline should be included in the count because they did so before the DOJ withdrew its support for the amendment in 1982.
Opponents of the ERA argue that the 1982 deadline was binding and that the three states that ratified after that date should not be counted. They also contend that the ERA ratification process was tainted by fraud and coercion and that the amendment is therefore invalid.

Data and Statistics

The following data points and statistics provide context for the ERA debate:

The ERA was first proposed in 1923 and was passed by Congress in 1972.
38 states ratified the ERA by 1977, but the amendment was not added to the Constitution because it did not meet the required 38-state threshold by the 1982 deadline.
In 2020, Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the ERA, followed by North Carolina and Illinois in 2021.
Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the validity of the ERA ratification process, including lawsuits from Alabama, Louisiana, and South Dakota.

Social and Political Implications

The ERA debate has significant social and political implications. Proponents of the amendment argue that it is necessary to ensure equal rights for women and that it would have a positive impact on women's lives. Opponents of the amendment argue that it is unnecessary and that it would harm women by undermining traditional family values.

The ERA has also become a symbol of the ongoing debate over gender equality in the United States. The legal battle over the amendment's validity is likely to continue for some time, and the outcome will have significant implications for the future of women's rights in the United States.

Conclusion

President Biden's declaration of support for the Equal Rights Amendment has reignited a decades-old legal battle over the amendment's validity. The legal arguments surrounding the ERA are complex and involve multiple perspectives. The outcome of the legal battle will have significant social and political implications for women's rights in the United States.