Isabella Carter
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is a proposed amendment to the US Constitution that would guarantee equal rights for women. The ERA was first proposed in 1923 and has been reintroduced in every session of Congress since 1982. Despite meeting the ratification requirements of the Constitution's Article V, the ERA has not been certified and published as part of the Constitution. The amendment has faced opposition from anti-abortion groups and has been the subject of legal uncertainty due to expired deadlines and state revocations. In 2024, a group of Democrats in the House of Representatives argued that the ERA had been successfully ratified by 38 states and urged President Biden to direct the Archivist of the United States to certify the amendment. While the ERA has not yet been formally recognized as part of the Constitution, it continues to be a topic of debate and discussion in the US.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Introduction of the ERA in Congress | 1923 |
| ERA proposed by | Alice Paul, woman suffrage leader and head of the National Woman's Party |
| ERA statement | Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction |
| Number of states that have ratified the ERA | 38 |
| Year of the first ERA strike | 1970 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by 22 state legislatures | 1972 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by eight more states | 1973 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by five more states | 1974-1977 |
| ERA deadline | March 22, 1979 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by Nevada | 2017 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by Illinois | 2018 |
| Year when the ERA was ratified by Virginia | 2020 |
| Year when the ERA was supported by the American Bar Association | 2024 |
| ERA as the amendment to the Constitution | 28th Amendment |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The ERA's impact on abortion rights
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been opposed by anti-abortion groups who believe it would allow legal abortion without limits and with taxpayer funding. The ERA was first proposed in 1923 and introduced in Congress in the same year. It states that "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction".
The ERA has met the ratification requirements of the Constitution's Article V, but it has still not been certified and published as part of the Constitution. In 2020, ERA ratification resolutions HJ1 and SJ1 were passed in their respective chambers, but the legal uncertainty of the Virginian ratification remains due to expired deadlines and five revocations.
Despite this, three-fourths of US states have ratified the amendment, and many argue it is the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. The ERA would give Congress the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the amendment's provisions, empowering the legislative branch to strengthen legal protections against sex discrimination in areas including gender-based violence, education, the workplace, and access to reproductive healthcare.
The ERA would provide an unassailable basis for applying equal justice under law and guaranteeing 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. This has been interpreted by some to mean that the ERA mandates taxpayer-funded abortions. For example, in New Mexico, every justice on the Supreme Court agreed that the ERA language mandates taxpayer funding of abortions, and a similar ruling was made in Connecticut. In Pennsylvania, the state's ERA was used to challenge a ban on Medicaid coverage for abortion, with the justices finding the ban "presumptively unconstitutional".
The ERA would have a significant impact on abortion rights, providing a constitutional foundation for sex equality and reproductive autonomy. It is important to note that the ERA has not yet been formally recognized as part of the US Constitution, and there is ongoing debate and legal uncertainty surrounding its ratification.
The Constitution and Multiparty Politics
You may want to see also
The ERA's effect on women in the military
Women have served in the U.S. military in one form or another for over 200 years. During the American Revolution, women like Margaret Corbin and Deborah Sampson disguised themselves as men and fought alongside their husbands. Women have also served as nurses, with Clara Barton and Dorothea Dix being notable examples from the Civil War. Approximately 3,000 women served as nurses for the Union Army during the Civil War, and over 3,000 served in hospitals during World War I.
Despite women's long history of service in the military, they have faced decades of obstacles and discrimination. Women were not always permitted to enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces, and it was only in the Obama years that all combat positions were opened to them. Women have also been underrepresented in senior leadership positions, with only six women reaching the rank of four-star general as of 2023.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would guarantee equal rights for women and men. The ERA was first proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, a woman suffrage leader, and it has been reintroduced in Congress every year since 1982. The ERA has been ratified by 38 states, meeting the requirements of Article V of the Constitution, but it has not yet been certified and published as part of the Constitution.
The ERA would have a significant impact on women in the military by guaranteeing them equal rights and eliminating sex discrimination. Women in the military would have the same rights to adequate equipment, training, clothing, benefits, and career progression as their male counterparts. The ERA would also increase the size of the talent pool for recruiting, providing more opportunities for women to serve in the military.
In addition, the ERA would empower Congress to strengthen legal protections against sex discrimination in areas such as gender-based violence, education, the workplace, and access to reproductive healthcare. The ERA would provide a basis for courts to enforce equal justice under the law, as advocated by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
While there is still work to be done to achieve full gender equity in the military, the ERA represents a significant step forward in recognizing the contributions and rights of women who serve their country.
The Constitution's Main Writer: Uncovering the Founding Father's Legacy
You may want to see also
The ERA's role in reproductive rights
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been a long-standing proposal to amend the US Constitution to guarantee equal rights for women and men. It was first proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, a woman suffrage leader, and introduced in Congress, where it has been reintroduced in every session since 1982. Despite meeting the ratification requirements of the Constitution's Article V, the ERA has faced opposition and has not been certified as part of the Constitution.
The need for the ERA in reproductive rights has become increasingly crucial following the 2022 US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson, which overruled Roe v. Wade. This decision dismantled the federal constitutional right to abortion, returning control of abortion law to the states. The ruling exposed the vulnerability of reproductive rights without explicit legal protections, with states like Arizona stripping away access to sexual reproductive health services and bodily autonomy.
State-level ERAs have shown promise in protecting reproductive rights post-Dobbs. For example, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that a Medicaid ban on abortion coverage was "presumptively unconstitutional" under the state's ERA, advancing reproductive autonomy for marginalized women. Similarly, limitations for state-funded abortion care were struck down in Nevada, offering hope for the future of reproductive rights.
The ERA is necessary to enshrine gender equality in the US Constitution and protect reproductive rights as universal human rights. Without it, women's equality remains at risk, with the potential for further rollbacks of hard-won human rights.
Murder in Arizona: Death Penalty for 1st Degree?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The ERA's opposition by anti-abortion groups
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been opposed by anti-abortion groups for several reasons. Firstly, they argue that the ERA would be interpreted to allow legal abortion without restrictions and potentially enable taxpayer funding for abortions. Anti-abortion groups believe that the ERA, if passed, would enshrine a right to abortion into the Constitution. They argue that the ERA's language of equal rights for men and women would require judges to strike down anti-abortion laws as they violate both the constitutional right to privacy and sexual equality.
This interpretation is supported by pro-abortion groups, who agree that the ERA would reinforce the constitutional right to abortion. They see the ERA as a tool to challenge abortion restrictions and protect women's bodily autonomy, especially in light of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
The opposition to the ERA by anti-abortion groups is part of a broader anti-abortion movement in the United States, which is associated with religious groups, particularly the Catholic Church and Evangelical churches, as well as secular organizations. This movement has been politically active, seeking to reverse Roe v. Wade and promote legislative changes or constitutional amendments that prohibit or restrict abortion.
The anti-abortion movement has mobilized since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, with the creation of organizations such as the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and Operation Save America (OSA). They argue that abortion laws are morally illegitimate and work to promote anti-abortion bills at the state level, even in states where they have a low chance of success.
Despite the opposition, the ERA has gained support from advocates and scholars who argue that it is necessary to enshrine gender equality in the Constitution. As of 2020, three-fourths of U.S. states have ratified the amendment, and it is considered the 28th Amendment by many. However, the ERA has not yet been formally recognized as part of the U.S. Constitution.
College Students' Views on Constitution's Relevance
You may want to see also
The ERA's implications for existing benefits for women
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been a topic of discussion and debate among feminists and women's rights advocates for decades. The ERA is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would guarantee equal rights for women and men, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex. While the ERA has not yet been formally adopted as a constitutional amendment, it has been ratified by a majority of states and continues to be a relevant issue in the 21st century.
The implications of the ERA for existing benefits for women have been a point of contention. Some opponents of the amendment argue that women would lose certain benefits and protections they currently receive, such as alimony, child custody advantages, and Social Security payments. They claim that the loss of these benefits would outweigh the gain in equality. On the other hand, supporters of the ERA argue that the amendment would not necessarily result in the loss of these benefits. Court decisions in states with ERAs show that benefits can remain constitutional if they are legislated in a sex-neutral manner based on function rather than stereotyped sex roles.
The ERA would have significant implications for reproductive rights. Properly interpreted, it could negate laws restricting access to abortion care and contraception, recognizing that the denial of these services to women specifically is a form of sex discrimination. Additionally, the ERA could address discrimination in insurance, where women are currently charged higher premiums for car insurance and annuities, resulting in equal benefits for women and men upon retirement.
The ERA would also empower Congress to strengthen legal protections against sex discrimination in various areas, including gender-based violence, education, the workplace, and access to reproductive healthcare. It would provide an "unassailable basis" for courts to uphold the principle of equal justice under law for all men and women, guaranteeing their rights equally.
Overall, while there are differing opinions on the specific implications of the ERA for existing benefits for women, the amendment's overarching goal is to ensure equal rights and protections for both women and men, addressing historical inequalities and discriminatory practices.
Iran's Constitution: Exporting Islamic Revolution?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The ERA is a proposed amendment to the US Constitution that guarantees equal rights for women.
No, the ERA has not been added to the Constitution. However, it has met the ratification requirements of the Constitution’s Article V.
There is legal uncertainty regarding deadlines and revocations. The ERA has faced opposition from anti-abortion groups and states that have rescinded their earlier ratification of the ERA.
