9 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Justin Gibson's avatar

President Biden declared today that the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is the law of the land to become the 28th Amendment to the Constitution, but doesn’t order the national archivist to formally approve its addition.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/17/biden-era-amendment-004495

Expand full comment
Henrik's avatar

Fuck it, do it, set up the legal battle. Make the GOP fight it

Expand full comment
Justin Gibson's avatar

Agreed.

Expand full comment
Diogenes's avatar

Colleen Shogan, the U.S. archivist, says too much time has passed and is refusing to insert the ERA into the Constitution. Shogan was appointed by Biden. If Biden were as ruthless as Trump, he would immediately fire Shogan and appoint someone who would carry out his wishes with the ERA.

Expand full comment
Kevin H.'s avatar

Is there a time limit? If not they really should have one when they start these things.

Expand full comment
axlee's avatar

There was a time limit when ERA was sent to the states for ratification, although it is slightly questionable if Congress could constitutionally impose a time limit. However, since Congress had clearly in years rescinded or sunset amendments not yet ratified, the time limit looks an absolutely legal automatic rescind or sunset. I believe any reasonable SCOTUS will interpret this way.

The declaration is a pure BS. Talking about from a party claiming defending democracy and Constitutional rule. Sad

Expand full comment
axlee's avatar

The right thing to do, was to re-propose ERA in 2021 and dare any Rs to vote against it.

Expand full comment
ArcticStones's avatar

Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment on 27 January, 2020. Why, oh why, wait four years to make this declaration??

Now, Joe, please make sure Merrick publishes Jack’s report on Donald’s theft and mishandling of classified documents. Immediately! Or it will never see the light of day.

Expand full comment
DiesIrae's avatar

I support the ERA, but it seems really unlikely to hold up. Requires SCOTUS to ignore a Congressional timeline and also say that states can't rescind ratification. It's not how I'd interpret the amendment process.

Expand full comment