ERA: In the States In the States In the States The ERA in the States The Equal Rights Amendment was passed by Congress on March 22, 1972 and sent to the states for ratification by both houses of their state legislatures. A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution when approved by three-fourths (38) of the 50 states. During the next five years, 35 states approved the amendment. By the Congressionally imposed deadline of June 30, 1982, however, no additional states had voted yes, and the ERA fell three states short of ratification. The 15 states that have not yet ratified the Equal Rights Amendment are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia. Beginning in 1995, after formulation of the " three-state strategy " for ERA ratification, ERA bills have been introduced in one or more legislative sessions in nine of the unratified states (Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Virginia).

The Illinois House, but not the Senate, passed an ERA ratification bill in 2003. In 2011, 2012, and 2014, the Virginia Senate passed a resolution ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, but the House of Delegates did not release the companion bill from committee for a full vote on the House floor. Reports from the Grassroots ERA advocates in the majority of the 15 unratified states and a number of the 35 ratified states have continued to educate and organize politically to put the Equal Rights Amendment into the Constitution. Continuing updates are provided here to inform policymakers and the public about political activity that is currently happening with the Equal Rights Amendment at the state level. Click on the name of a state to to see what's going on there with the ERA. Unratified States [Further information: Diana Egozcue, VA NOW President, dclj@comcast.net ] Virginia Senate passes Equal Rights Amendment Augusta Free Press January 26, 2016 The Equal Rights Amendment cleared the floor of the Virginia Senate for the fifth time in six years.

SJ 1 , sponsored by Senator Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax), passed 21-19 on Tuesday on a near-party-line vote with most Senate Republicans opposed​. Speaking to the bill on the Senate floor, Senator Surovell said, “Virginia is one of 22 states that currently has gender equality in our Constitution. Section 11, Article 1 of the Constitution of Virginia currently says that ‘all people have the right to be free from government discrimination on the basis of religious conviction, race, color, sex, or national origin.’ So equal rights have been codified in our Constitution since 1971. This is something that isn’t new to Virginia. It is a Virginia value.” After the vote, Senator Mamie Locke (D-Hampton) said, “This is something that we have been fighting to advance for decades. True gender equality is not going to be achieved until we amend the U.S. Constitution, and the only way to amend the U.S. Constitution is to ratify the ERA at the state level. We are moving in the right direction.

I implore my colleagues in the House to now take this up and do the right thing.” Senator Barbara Favola (D-Arlington) said, “Gender equality has been in the Virginia Constitution for 40 years, but the same cannot be said at the federal level. ​Various ​sitting Supreme Court ​Justices ​have in fact maintained that equal treatment on the basis of gender is not included in the Fourteenth Amendment. This is something that is long overdue in Virginia and nationwide.​” The Virginia Senate has repeatedly moved to ratify the federal Equal Rights Amendment, approving SJ 216 in 2015, SJ 78 in 2014, SJ 130 in 2012 and SJ 537 in 2011. Each of these proposals died in the House. Gov. McAuliffe rallies at Capitol alongside women’s rights activists to ratify Equal Rights Amendment Words and photos by Amy David RVA Magazine (rvamag.com) February 16, 2016 Virginia Gov.

Terry McAuliffe joined a very lively, large crowd of women and a few men Tuesday morning in the Patrick Henry Building in Capitol Square to show his support for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. “Rain or shine, equal rights!” a group of women’s rights advocates and representatives from ERA advocacy groups shouted at the top of the Virginia Capitol steps this morning. Introduced in 1923 by suffragist leader and National Woman’s Party founder Alice Paul, the ERA states equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Virginia is one of 15 states that have not ratified the ERA yet, guaranteeing gender equality in the U.S. Constitution. Local organization Women-Matter, Congresswomen, senators, Ralph S. Northam, Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, Nancy Rodrigues, Secretary of Administration of Virginia,the League of Women Voters of Virginia, students, local mothers in the community and other women’s rights activists spoke in honor of the suffragists who rallied for equal rights on the Capitol steps 100 years ago. The Centennial rally held today was to push Virginia to pass the ERA.

Keynote speaker McAuliffe was greeted with a standing ovation and cheers and took to the podium to discuss his views on the ERA and creating equal rights for all women in the Commonwealth. “I told women I would be a brick wall to protect their rights and I’m proud to stand here today that brick wall is stronger than it’s ever been,” McAuliffe said. “We’ve very quickly with executive order right off the bat, no discrimination at all in our state work force based on who you love, gender, religion at all we just cannot have that here in the Commonwealth of Virginia.” He touched on the improvements being made in healthcare and education. "I'm putting a billion dollars of new funding into education," he said. "Teacher pay raises are long overdue, we are fully funding teacher retirement plans two years ahead of time, I've put $139 million in the budget to put 2,500 instructional staff back in the classrooms. Thats hat this budget that i have proposed, I want to make sure every woman has access to the best education possible in the Commonwealth of Virginia." McAuliffe also mentioned his task force and pilot program put in place in 2014 to combat sexual violence on college campuses.

“It will allow us now the opportunity to have independent neutral investigations of criminal incidents of sexual violence" he said. "We need to keep our colleges safe for everyone. We are going to end campus sexual violence." Before closing, the governor congratulated the Virginia League of Women Voters organization for their efforts for women's rights over the years. “Virginia legislature did not show their support for the 19th amendment as you know until 1952,” he said. “We should make it easier for people to vote, not more difficult. The league has continued to shine light to make sure every women and man had the opp to go vote so I thank you for your dedication to the great work on this." Senator Adam Ebbin, (D-Alexandria) credited Virginia Congresswoman Leslie Byrne for pushing the ERA in the General Assembly. We’ve been fortunate enough to get the ERA out of the Senate committee repeatedly, and I want to thank Leslie Bynre for starting that legislative effort,” Ebbin said.

“Lets be persistent in getting it out of the House of Delegates whether it's next week in this session if not we’ll be back until it does.” Del Sam Rasoul, (D-Roanoke) is a member of the Virginia House of Delegates and spoke on the continuing discrimination facing women and people of color today. “A guy with a last name Rasoul getting elected in Southwest Virginia you see one or two things in discrimination,” said Rasoul, “This is a common injustice that we all have to fight against. This discrimination is an ignorance that we must fight. I don’t understand why we have such a brick wall there that’s preventing the ratification of the ERA so as a member of the privilege and elections committee we’ve been working hard to have a fair voice.” Senators Jennifer T. Wexton and Scott A. Surovell are Chief Patrons of SJ1, a bill that would ratify the ERA, and recently just cleared the Senate floor. The two spoke on the importance of getting their legislation out of the House since in the last six years, it's been killed there five times.

“Im so happy to be here to celebrate this 100th anniversary of when the dedicated group of women and men gathered on the Capitol steps to demand that women get the right to vote,” Sen. Jennifer Wexton said. “We still have a ways to go…only the Constitution grants Constitutional rights." Sen. Scott Surovell also weighed in on his personal connection to the bill. “In 1972 I was one years old and my mother came to this building across the street to testify in favor of the ERA," he said. "She's always told me how it important it was to her that’s why when I was elected to the Virginia state Senate the first bill i put in was ratification of the ERA." Sen. Barbara Favola also spoke on the matter advocating that the ERA would guarantee women the same rights and privileges as men in the working world. “We’re more than half of our population, we’ve worked hard, were mothers we’re sisters, we’re daughters, and you know we get a lot of work done and that should be recognized," she said.

"One day we will find it easier to get equal pay for equal work passed, we’ll be able to get better family leave programs, we’ll have more access to health care and our country will be stronger and healthier.” Leslie Byrne was the first woman elected to Congress from Virginia and has focused her efforts on getting the ERA passed. “Equality under the law shall not be denied,” said Byrne. “I wish that equality under the law was given as much attention as a well ordered militia right to bear arms. Wouldn’t it be lovely if those folks over in the General Assembly thought as highly as 3 and half million women in Virginia as a hand full of gun owners? She stressed to the crowd it was their job to reach out to the GA and let them know the ERA needs to be passed. “You better find a reason to make people vote for this,” she said. “Whether it’s their self interest, whether it’s their daughters, their wives, their mothers, you know the right to vote was passed by a guy that bullied by his mother. You do have the power.

You have shown grit, you have shown determination, we will get this done.” It wasn't only politicians and individuals from women’s rights groups at the rally, there were also actual descendants from founders of the women’s rights movement. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men and women are created equal,” said Coline Jenkins, quoting her great grandmother, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, founder of the Suffragist Movement. Jenkins was referring to Stanton’s Declaration of Sentiments, presented at the Seneca Falls Convention, the first women’s rights convention held in 1848. Jenkins then directed her speech directly toward Del. Mark Cole and Speaker of the House William Howell, both in opposition of ratifying the ERA. “I believe in equality,” she said. "I have a daughter and I have a son. I don’t want my daughter tramped down, I don’t want my son tramped down, the best way to ensure full equality is equal rights amendment in the fundamental document of the U.S. Constitution.” She exited the podium holding up the sign that read, ‘Equal Means Equal.” SJ1 is scheduled to be heard in the Priviledges and Elections Committee on Friday at 9:30 a.m.

House panel blocks equal rights amendment Capital News Service March 5, 2016 RICHMOND, Va. — A handful of men and women who want Virginia to ratify the federal Equal Rights Amendment rallied outside a committee meeting room at the General Assembly, holding signs that read “Equal Means Equal” and “ERA.” But the House Privileges and Elections Committee decided to shelve the ERA, which would guarantee women and men equal rights, for another year. “This is the fifth year in a row we have passed [the amendment] with bipartisan support in the Senate. And on crossover, you see that it’s not only ignored but completely obstructed,” said Eileen Davis, co-founder of the group Women Matter. “At what point are you simply obstructing the democratic process? We’re not giving up.” The ERA would put in the U.S. Constitution a guarantee 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.” Congress proposed the amendment in 1972 and gave the states 10 years to ratify it. It was never added to the Constitution because it was not ratified by the necessary 38 states.

Virginia would have become the 36th state to approve the ERA under Senate Joint Resolution 1, sponsored by Democratic Sens. Scott Surovell of Mount Vernon and Jennifer Wexton of Leesburg. The resolution, which cleared the Senate on a 21-19 vote on Jan. 26, maintained that the ERA still could be ratified despite the expiration of the 10-year ratification period set by Congress. After its approval by the Senate, SJR 1 crossed over to the House, where it was assigned to the House Privileges and Elections Committee. That panel already had killed an identical measure – House Joint Resolution 136, sponsored by Del. Mark D. Sickles, D-Fairfax. On Friday, it did the same to the Senate counterpart. Sickles and other ERA supporters were disappointed. “I’m for equality for everybody,” Sickles said.

“The only sure way to have secure equality is through the Constitution.” According to Sickles, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia “said that women aren’t protected under the Constitution.” “He was a big supporter of amendments and amending the Constitution: If you wanted to change something or find some right you didn’t think was there, amend the Constitution. This is the way we need to go under his philosophy,” Sickles said. Opponents of resolutions to ratify the ERA say the measures are pointless because the ratification deadline passed on June 30, 1982. But the resolutions’ supporters disagree. “There are other constitutional amendments that have lain dormant for years and years,” said Del. Jennifer Boysko, D-Herndon. “And they have gotten traction and eventually passed as well.” In particular, ERA supporters cite the 27th Amendment, about compensation for members of Congress. That amendment was submitted to the states in 1789 and wasn’t ratified until 1992. “We shouldn’t have to wait for any of our fundamental rights,” Sickles said. “But it’s been our history.

Look how long it took us to stop Jim Crow and segregation – and we’re still having lingering effects of that today.” Another issue is that many young women do not even know the ERA hasn’t been ratified, Davis said. “Many think everything is fine.” But everything is not fine, Boysko said. “There are studies that show that a man and a woman – equal in grades in graduate school – get out, go to the same firm and within five years, the man is making 20 percent more than she is.” Davis said that more than 70 percent of Americans believe the ERA has already been ratified. That misconception is even more prevalent among people under 40. “When we get the word out, there’s going to be a huge outcry,” said Davis, who has urged members of the House of Delegates to approve the resolution. “But part of the reason word’s not getting out is because it’s being suppressed in this chamber.” Del. Sam Rasoul, D-Roanoke, supports the ERA and its ratification. “In 2016, what kind of signal are we sending that we do not want women to be equal in the eyes of the Constitution as men?

We should be well past this debate.” Danette Fulk, a Republican and military veteran who was among the ERA supporters at Friday’s hearing, likened the issue to the 14th Amendment, which granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” including newly freed slaves. “The 14th Amendment was passed in 1868,” Fulk said. “But it took 100 years to come up with the walls – the legislation that supported that foundation. We’re a little bit flipped. We’ve had some of these walls built that can be torn down, but we don’t have the foundation. The ERA would be that foundation.” Sickles is unsure whether he will continue to sponsor an ERA ratification resolution next session. But he assured the activists, “It doesn’t matter who the patron is” as long as someone keeps pushing the issue. Sickles is confident the ERA will eventually be ratified. “A big shift is coming in our country,” he said. “We have a cultural grand canyon now on so many social issues.” By Rachel Beatrice/Capital News Service Capital News Service is a flagship program of VCU’s Robertson School of Media and Culture.

Students participating in the program provide state government coverage for Virginia’s community newspapers and other media outlets, under the supervision of Associate Professor Jeff South. What the Resolution Says Here is the text of Senate Joint Resolution 1 to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution: WHEREAS, a concurrent or joint resolution is a resolution adopted by both houses of a bicameral legislature, which does not require the signature of the chief executive, and a concurrent resolution is sufficient for a state’s ratification of an amendment to the United States Constitution; and WHEREAS, the United States Congress adopted the 27th Amendment to the United States Constitution, the so-called Madison Amendment, relating to compensation of members of Congress; and WHEREAS, the Madison Amendment was proposed by our first Congress and only recently ratified by three-fourths of the states, and the Archivist of the United States certified the 27th Amendment on May 18, 1992, or 203 years after it was first proposed; and WHEREAS, the founders of our nation, James Madison included, did not favor further restrictions to Article V of the United States Constitution, the amending procedure; and WHEREAS, the United States Constitution is harder to amend than any other constitution in history; and WHEREAS, the restricting time limit for the Equal Rights Amendment ratification is in the resolving clause and is not a part of the amendment proposed by Congress and already ratified by 35 states; and WHEREAS, constitutional equality for women

 and men continues to be a timely issue in the United States and worldwide, and a number of other nations have achieved constitutional equality for their women and men; and WHEREAS, since Congress passed a time extension for the Equal Rights Amendment on October 20, 1978, Congress has demonstrated that a time limit in a resolving clause can be disregarded if it is not a part of the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, Congress is in a unique position to judge the tenor of the nation, to be aware of the political, social, and economic factors affecting the nation, and to be aware of the importance to the nation of the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, if an amendment to the United States Constitution has been proposed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress and ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures, it is for Congress to determine the validity of the state ratifications occurring after a time limit in the resolving clause, but not in the amendment itself; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED by the Senate, the House of Delegates concurring, That the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia hereby ratify and affirm the Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution proposed by the United States Congress on March 22, 

1972, and ratified by 35 state legislatures.

The complete text of House Joint Resolution 208 proposing the Equal Rights Amendment follows: HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 208 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission by the Congress: “Article– “Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. “Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. “Section 3.

This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.”; and, be it RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Clerk of the Senate transmit certified copies of this joint resolution to the President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, the members of the Virginia Congressional Delegation, and the Archivist of the United States at the National Archives and Records Administration of the United States. Ratified States Equal Rights Amendment passed by Congress - Mar 22, 1972 - HISTORY.com Equal Rights Amendment passed by Congress Share this: Equal Rights Amendment passed by Congress Author Equal Rights Amendment passed by Congress URL Publisher A+E Networks On March 22, 1972, the Equal Rights Amendment is passed by the U.S. Senate and sent to the states for ratification. First proposed by the National Woman’s political party in 1923, the Equal Rights Amendment was to provide for the legal equality of the sexes and prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. More than four decades later, the revival of feminism in the late 1960s spurred its introduction into Congress. Under the leadership of U.S.

Representative Bella Abzug of New York and feminists Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem, it won the requisite two-thirds vote from the U.S. House of Representatives in October 1971. In March 1972, it was approved by the U.S. Senate and sent to the states. Hawaii was the first state to ratify what would have been the 27th Amendment, followed by some 30 other states within a year. However, during the mid-1970s, a conservative backlash against feminism eroded support for the Equal Rights Amendment, which ultimately failed to achieve ratification by the a requisite 38, or three-fourths, of the states. Because of the rejection of the Equal Rights Amendment, sexual equality, with the notable exception of when it pertains to the right to vote, is not protected by the U.S. Constitution. However, in the late 20th century, the federal government and all states have passed considerable legislation protecting the legal rights of women.

The Equal Rights Amendment, in its most recently proposed form, reads, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.” Related Videos What is the Equal Rights Amendment? | ERA Education Project What is the Equal Rights Amendment? “It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.”– SUSAN B. ANTHONY Women’s Equality is the Civil Rights Issue of the Century RATIFICATION OF THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT IS THE FIRST FOUNDATIONAL STEP ON THE JOURNEY TO GLOBAL JUSTICE FOR WOMEN A Short ERA History Written by Alice Paul, the Equal Rights Amendment was first proposed in 1923 and was subsequently reintroduced in every Congressional session for half a century. For 50 years, the Amendment was both championed and vilified by some of both sides of the aisle. The tide turned in favor of equality in 1972 when the hard work of the women’s movement garnered the ERA widespread support, including an endorsement from President Nixon. Rightfully, both houses of Congress approved the measure.

In order to become a Constitutional amendment, the legislatures of 38 states had to approve the ERA within seven years of Congressional passage and the momentum in favor of equality seemed to guarantee its authorization. Unfortunately, as the deadline approached, only 35 states had ratified. A 39-month extension was given, but the ERA failed to secure the necessary support. The ERA has been reintroduced into Congress every year since 1982, but, given the fact that 75% – 90% OF AMERICANS MISTAKENLY BELIEVE THAT THE ERA ALREADY PASSED it has never been voted on again. The 15 states whose legislatures never ratified the Equal Rights Amendment are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia. Present Strategies For Ratification Currently there are two main strategies to successfully pass the ERA: (1) REINTRODUCTION The ERA would be ratified by starting over the traditional process of passage by a two-thirds majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives followed by ratification by legislatures in three-quarters (38) of the 50 states.

On June 22, 2011, ERA ratification bills were introduced in the the House of Representatives (H.J. Res. 69) by lead sponsor Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and in the Senate (S.J.Res. 21) by lead sponsor Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ). Currently there are 183 sponsors in Congress and 12 sponsors in the Senate. **Current Congressional Sponsors of ERA are listed here: (2) THREE STATE STRATEGY The ERA was passed out of Congress in 1972 and was ratified by 35 of the necessary 38 states needed to make a super-majority. If three more states vote yes, it is possible the ERA could become the 28th amendment. However, that would mean first passing a resolution in Congress – the HJ Res. 47 Resolution – that would ask Congress to waive the time limit. On March 8, 2011, U.S. Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), introduced the HJ Res. 47 which if passed, would eliminate the time limit for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment proposed to the states.

It declares that such amendment shall be part of the Constitution whenever ratified by the necessary number of additional states, not under a time limit. The three state strategy is based on the fact that the “Madison Amendment,” concerning Congressional pay raises, became the 27th Amendment to the Constitution in 1992, after a ratification period of 203 years. Time limits were not imposed on amendments before 1917 (beginning with the 18th Amendment, Prohibition); and the 19th Amendment affirming women’s right to vote had no time limit. Congress demonstrated its belief that it may alter a time limit in a proposing clause by extending the original ERA deadline. Therefore, according to advocates of this strategy it is likely that Congress has the power to adjust or repeal the previous time limit on the ERA, determine whether state ratifications subsequent to 1982 are valid, and accept the ERA as part of the Constitution after three more states ratify.

To learn more about the Three State Strategy visit: ERA: In the States In the States In the States The ERA in the States The Equal Rights Amendment was passed by Congress on March 22, 1972 and sent to the states for ratification by both houses of their state legislatures. A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution when approved by three-fourths (38) of the 50 states. During the next five years, 35 states approved the amendment. By the Congressionally imposed deadline of June 30, 1982, however, no additional states had voted yes, and the ERA fell three states short of ratification. The 15 states that have not yet ratified the Equal Rights Amendment are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia. Beginning in 1995, after formulation of the " three-state strategy " for ERA ratification, ERA bills have been introduced in one or more legislative sessions in eight of the unratified states (Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Virginia).

The Illinois House, but not the Senate, passed an ERA ratification bill in 2003. In February 2011 and February 2012, the Virginia Senate passed a resolution ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, but the House of Delegates did not release the companion bill from committee for a full vote on the House floor. Reports from the Grassroots ERA advocates in the majority of the 15 unratified States and a number of the 35 ratified States have continued to educate and organize politically to put the Equal Rights Amendment into the Constitution. Continuing updates are provided here to inform policymakers and the public about political activity that is currently happening with the Equal Rights Amendment at the State level. Click on the name of a State to see the latest activity. Unratified States April 3, 2013 Senate committee fails to pass ERA ratification bill on April 2 SJR 19 , a bill ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, failed to pass out of the Arkansas Senate's Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs on Tuesday, April 2. The committee, which includes 5 Republicans and 3 Democrats, rejected the bill by a voice vote along party lines.

ERA bills were also introduced in the state's 2005 and 2007 legislative sessions and failed to get out of committee by tie votes in both years. Primary sponsors of the 2013 bill are Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-31) and Rep. Warwick Sabin (D-33). Lindsley Smith, former AR Representative and primary sponsor of the 2007 ERA bill, testified in favor of the bill. Equal Rights Amendment resurfaces as issue myFOXtampabay.com April 9, 2013 TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - Women's-rights activists are trying to revive a campaign to add Florida to the list of states that ratified the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. A proposal (HCR 8001) seeking to make Florida the 36th state to ratify the 1970s-era amendment was reviewed Tuesday by the House Local and Federal Affairs Committee. The committee didn't vote after hearing from amendment supporters, including one who urged lawmakers to "have the backbone" to vote. Rep.

Lori Berman says women have made great strides toward equality but insists the amendment is needed as a "fundamental legal remedy" against any remaining gender discrimination. A law professor says a vote might have no binding effect since the ratification deadline long passed. Supporters say Congress or the courts could accept more ratification votes. Illinois Lawmakers Push State to Ratify Decades-old 'Equal Rights Amendment’ mystateline.com April 15, 2013 SPRINGFIELD -- More than 40 years after it passed Congress and 30 years after the 'Equal Rights Amendment' lapsed after failing to get 38 states needed to ratify it, three state Representatives are introducing a bill to have Illinois ratify it. If passed, Illinois would be the first state since 1982 to pass the Equal Rights Amendment. 35 states did pass the 'ERA', but the act expired in 1983 before getting approval in 2/3rd's or states, meaning even adoption by three more states would not legally ratify it as an amendment to the Constitution.

Supporters believe that after passage by three more states, they could then argue in the courts that that the time limits imposed by and later extended by Congress for passage of the 'Equal Rights Amendment' are not legitimate because time limits are not mandated by the Constitution. Some legal analysts have expressed doubts that the Supreme Court would overturn previous rulings requiring a "sufficiently contemporaneous" time period for an amendment to the Constitution, or overturn a deadline self-imposed by Congress. Re-passage of a new Equal Rights Amendment by two-thirds of Congress and 38 states is seen as highly unlikely politically. The 1972 Equal Rights Amendment states the following: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. It was passed at a time when gender discrimination was rampant, and supporters believed the only way to address it was with a Constitutional Amendment.

Opponents argued, however, that women are already covered under the Constitution's 'equal protection clause' and that creating a separate amendment only for women would create more legal problems for women than it solved. Reps. Lou Lang, Kelly M. Cassidy and Naomi D. Jakobsson disagree. They have introduced the 'Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment' bill in the Illinois House. They argue the Amendment is needed because, as they wrote in a news release, "women do not have constitutional protection when it pertains to sexual and gender discrimination, fair and equal pay and the guarantee of a fair and balanced trial when a woman is raped-including women in the military." It goes before the House Judiciary Committee for consideration on Tuesday [Apr. 16]. [Further information: Marena Groll, nc4era@gmail.com ] NC4ERA ALERT April 30, 2013 After more than 40 years, North Carolina will walk back onto the historical stage with an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) vigil coming on the heels of Mother's Day. The "Simple Justice, Long Overdue" Support the ERA!

event will be held on Wed., May 15, 2013, from 12 noon – 2:00 pm, on the grounds of the NC Legislative Bldg., 16 West Jones Street, Raleigh, NC. Attendees are encouraged to bring their own signs to express support for the ERA. This vigil will mark the anticipated May 9 introduction of a bipartisan joint resolution in the U.S. Congress to remove the deadline for the states' ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). The lead sponsors of the legislation are Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) in the Senate and Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ) in the House. We strongly urge NC residents to immediately contact U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan's office at 202-224-6342 and request that she become an original co-sponsor of the Senate bill before May 9. (A bill number will not be available until the legislation is introduced.) North Carolina is one of the 15 states that have not yet ratified the ERA.

Legal analysis supports the premise that if three more states ratify, the existing 35 state ratifications achieved during the 1972-82 campaign are still valid. If you plan on attending the May 15 event or have questions, please contact Marena Groll at nc4era@gmail.com . Resolution Calls for ERA Ratification April 3, 2013 A resolution calling on both houses of Congress to pass legislation aimed at putting the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) into the U.S. Constitution has been gaining political and grassroots support in North Carolina since the beginning of March 2013. Marena Groll of Sneads Ferry drafted the Onslow Initiative Resolution after attending a Mar. 2 ERA program in Washington, DC, led by the National Women's Political Caucus and co-sponsored by the American Association of University Women and the ERA Task Force of the National Council of Women's Organizations. "It's exciting to see this kind of enthusiastic response," Groll said.

"Many would hardly see us as the county to stage the comeback push for the ERA in North Carolina." The ERA states "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex." It was passed by Congress in 1972 but fell three states short of the 38 needed for ratification by a June 30, 1982 deadline. Legal analysis indicates that despite the time limit, the 35 existing ratifications may still be viable if three more state legislatures approve the amendment. The Onslow resolution promotes national legislation to implement both this "three-state strategy" and the traditional ratification process described in Article V of the Constitution. Although North Carolina is one of the 15 states that did not ratify the ERA between 1972 and 1982, Groll predicted, "This initiative could well put us on the map as ground zero in the struggle for the simple and long overdue justice of the ERA.

As one of the last three states needed, we could make history." Interest in the Equal Rights Amendment is growing both statewide and nationally as women's participation in the public arena increases dramatically at the same time as efforts intensify to reverse some of women's political and societal advances. "In hindsight," Groll said, "we see how much our country advances as women advance. Evidence from the 22 states that have had some version of a state ERA for many decades shows that the cultural fears of what women's equality would look like are unfounded." An April 2012 poll for Daily Kos and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) asked respondents, "Do you think the Constitution should guarantee equal rights for men and women, or not?" The replies were 91% yes, 4% no, and 5% not sure. While only Democratic and progressive grassroots organizations have endorsed the resolution so far, Groll encourages support for the ERA as a bipartisan issue. "The Republican Party adopted support of the ERA in its national platform in 1940, four years before the Democratic Party did," she said, "but then dropped it in 1980.

We encourage North Carolina Republicans to lead their party's return to its historic support of this guarantee of the right of the individual to be free from sex discrimination under the law." State and national information about the ERA can be found online at and . [Text may be amended as appropriate to apply to other organizations.] A Resolution calling for passage of the Equal Rights Amendment and removal of the time limit. Whereas, the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly guarantee that all of the rights it protects are held equally by all citizens without regard to sex and the only right it specifically affirms to be equal for men and women is the right to vote in the 19th Amendment, 1920; and Whereas, the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause has never been interpreted to guarantee equal rights for women in the same way the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) would as demonstrated by the fact that currently cases of sexual discrimination receive only a heightened level of intermediate scrutiny but should receive the highest level of strict judicial scrutiny, just as racial discrimination does; and Whereas, the ERA ensures that women will have equal rights under the U.S.

Constitution, and the 2012 Democratic National Platform reaffirms women's rights as civil rights as well as its continuing support of the ERA; and Whereas, the ERA was passed by Congress in 1972 and ratified by 35 of the 38 states necessary to put it into the Constitution, yet was debatably assumed to have expired in 1982; and Whereas, more recent legal analysis supports the conclusion that the Constitution imposes no time limit for ratification of amendments; Congress can alter time limits in the proposing clauses of amendments; and ratification of the Madison (27th) Amendment 203 years after it was first proposed supports the premise that state ERA ratification votes since 1972 are sufficiently contemporaneous; Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that we call on all members of the U.S.

House and Senate to co-sponsor, support, and pass into law joint resolution bills* for both the traditional Article V ratification process of the ERA and also for the "three-state strategy" process that would remove the time limit for ratification of the ERA so that ratification shall be achieved upon the affirmative vote of 38 states, of which 35 have already ratified; and Be it Further Resolved, that support for either strategy is not mutually exclusive with support for the other; and Be it Finally Resolved, that the Democratic Party of ________________ County pursue grassroots and legislative strategies for passage of the ERA and support of the Article V and three-state strategies to put the Equal Rights Amendment into the Constitution. Approved by the ________________ County Democratic Party, this ____ day of ______, 20___. Signatures: Party Chair_____________________________________________ Party Secretary__________________________________________ * The Senate traditional ERA ratification bill, S.J. Res. 10, was introduced March 5 by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ); bill numbers of other ERA joint resolutions in the U.S. House and Senate will be available upon introduction in the near future.

Resolution adopted by: 3/03/13: 02-02 Precinct, Cabarrus County Democratic Party 3/13/13: Fayetteville National Organization for Women 3/14/13: Northeast B (NeB22) Precinct, Onslow County Democratic Party 3/15/13: Sneads Ferry (SF18) Precinct, Onslow County Democratic Party 3/19/13: Onslow County Democratic Women 3/25/13: Onslow County Democratic Party Executive Committee 3/28/13: Cabarrus County Democratic Women 3/28/13: Carteret County Democratic Women 4/13/13: Cabarrus County Democratic Party 4/13/13: Carteret County Democratic Party 4/18/13: Pitt County Democratic Women 4/20/13: Pitt County Democratic Party 4/20/13: Cumberland County Democratic Party 4/20/13: Onslow County Democratic Party 6 Constitutional Amendments That Just Missed the Cut | Mental Floss 6 Constitutional Amendments That Just Missed

 the Cut Getty Images Like us on Facebook Since 1789, Congress has approved 33 constitutional amendments.

Twenty-seven of those amendments were eventually ratified and became part of the Constitution. Six failed after being sent to the states. Here's the scoop on those six that didn't make the grade. 1. House Size "Article the First" may sound a bit Yoda-esque, but it was actually the first provision in the original proposal for the Bill of Rights. The amendment, which the first Congress approved in September 1789, basically provided a way to regulate the expansion of the House of Representatives as the country grew. Among other provisions, the amendment stated that after the House grew beyond 200 members, there would be no more than one Representative for every 50,000 citizens. Eleven states ratified the amendment between 1789 and 1792, but it never got the three-quarters majority of state support needed for ratification. Although the amendment is still technically eligible for ratification, it seems unnecessary now. Given the current U.S. population, if we went with the maximum ratio of one Representative for every 50,000 people, the House would balloon to over 5,000 Congressmen, which would make finding airtime for campaign commercials nearly impossible. 2.

Gifts From Abroad The Titles of Nobility amendment got the thumbs-up from the 11th Congress in 1810 but failed to gain the requisite traction with the states. The amendment was pretty straightforward; it stated that any U.S. citizen who accepted a title of nobility or honor from a foreign power would cease to be an American citizen and would no longer be eligible to hold an American office. Accepting a gift from a foreign power without Congress' permission would also cost the recipient his citizenship. Congress overwhelmingly approved this amendment, which seemed aimed at divorcing the U.S. from the allure of the European aristocracy, and twelve states ratified the amendment. However, five states weren't so keen on it, so the amendment never became part of the Constitution. Because there was no clause in the amendment that set a deadline for ratification, it's still technically fair game to add to the Constitution if three-quarters of the states ratify it. 3. "Persons Held to Labor or Service" The Corwin Amendment made it through Congress in 1861, so you can probably guess what hot-button issue it tackled.

The amendment, which was proposed by Ohio Representative Thomas Corwin, read, "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." While the language never mentions slavery directly, it's pretty clear who the "persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State" are. When Congress approved the amendment in March 1861, it was basically the legislature's last-gasp attempt at avoiding the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln even contacted states' governors in an attempt to get their support for the amendment. Obviously, it didn't work. The Civil War broke out just a month after Congress approved the amendment, and in the end only three states ratified the measure. Like the Title of Nobility amendment, though, it's technically still fair game for ratification. 4. Child Labor The Child Labor Amendment got Congressional approval in 1924.

Proposed by Ohio Representative Israel Moore Foster, the amendment sought to curb some of the era's horrifying child labor practices by giving Congress the exclusive power to "limit, regulate, and prohibit the labor of persons under eighteen years of age." As the time, there seemed to be a real need for better child labor regulation. The workforce of 10-to-16-year-olds had ballooned to over two million kids, and many of them weren't doing light work like mowing lawns and delivering newspapers. Twenty-eight states ratified the amendment during the 1920s and 1930s, but it never got the necessary three-quarters vote. You might have noticed, though, that your 12-year-old didn't traipse off to a shift at the steel mill this morning. Thank FDR. In 1938 he signed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which nixed labor by children under 16 or hazardous work by those under 18. In 1941 the Supreme Court upheld these provisions, which effectively meant that the Child Labor Amendment wasn't necessary anymore. Like the others, it's still technically pending ratification, though. 5.

Equality Now The Equal Rights Amendment is another pretty straightforward measure. Its key section read, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." The idea for a similar amendment had been kicking around for decades, but it didn't gain real traction until the early 1970s, when NOW ramped up its picketing efforts and the national Women's Strike for Equality in August 1970 drew greater attention to the need for women's rights. The debate around the amendment was particularly thorny. Some critics worried that the amendment would make women eligible for the draft and to serve in combat duty, while many working class women's groups were concerned that the amendment would nullify any of the protective labor laws that had been helping women in industrial fields. Congress approved the amendment in 1972, but unlike the previous failed amendments, this one had a time limit for its ratification. The original deadline for ratification was in 1979, and even after Congress pushed back the cutoff date to June 1982, only 35 of the required 38 states ratified the amendment.

The amendment isn't totally dead, though; it's been frequently reintroduced since the original 1982 deadline, most recently New York Representative Carolyn B. Maloney . 6. D.C. Statehood The District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment would have made all those D.C. "Taxation without Representation" license plates a thing of the past. In 1978 the 96th Congress approved an amendment that would have repealed the 23rd Amendment which gives D.C. its Electoral College votes and instead given the citizens of the District full congressional representation and the same ability to vote in national elections. To an impartial observer, giving D.C.'s 600,000 citizens congressional representation may sound like a fair idea. The states weren't so crazy about the notion, though. Some argued that a single city shouldn't be given two seats in the Senate, while others claimed that giving D.C. representation was tantamount to presenting the Democratic Party with a gift of two free Senate seats. Proponents counter that the District's population is actually larger than Wyoming's, and nobody's trying to swipe the Cowboy State's senators.

When the amendment expired in 1985, only 16 states had ratified it, leaving it well short of the 38 ratifications it needed. Congress frequently hears suggestions for new D.C. voting amendments, though, including ones that would give the District a seat in the House while withholding Senate representation. * * * * * * If you're a huge fan of one of these amendments that floundered, don't despair; these things can take some time. The 27th Amendment, which states that changes to congressional pay can't take effect until the next term starts, got congressional approval in 1789 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. It was over 202 years later when the states finally ratified it in 1992. Equal Rights Amendment - Credo Reference Embedding articles is subject to our Terms of use .

[{"style":"mla","pubnonperiodical":{"title":"Topic Pages","city":"Boston","publisher":"Credo Reference Publisher Contributors","year":2017,"state":"MA"},"pubtype":{"main":"pubnonperiodical","suffix":"pubdatabase"},"pubdatabase":{"year":"2017","month":"January","day":"19","yearaccessed":"2017","monthaccessed":"January","dayaccessed":"19","service":"Credo Reference","db":"Credo Reference","searchtext":""},"source":"chapter","chapter":{"title":"Equal Rights Amendment","type":"essay"}}] Topic Page: Equal Rights Amendment Summary Article: Equal Rights Amendment from The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia with Atlas and Weather Guide Proposed amendment to the US Constitution to provide for the equality of sexes under the law, originally proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, a leader of the women's suffrage movement.

The National Organization of Women (NOW), formed in 1966, made ratification of the ERA central to its mission, and, together with other interests, it undertook a major effort during the 1960s and early 1970s, culminating in the passage of the ERA by Congress in 1972. However, although the amendment received the necessary two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress, it failed to be ratified by sufficient states by the stipulated deadline of July 1982. Since its defeat, the ERA has been reintroduced in each opening session of Congress. The ERA would have made unconstitutional any laws granting one sex different rights from the other. In order to become law, the amendment needed a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress or a supporting petition of two-thirds of the state legislatures, followed by ratification by three-quarters of the states. Despite strong opposition from Conservative politicians and organizations, by August 1974 the amendment had been ratified by 33 of the required 38 states. A congressional mandate had set March 1979 as the deadline for ratification; by June 1978, only two additional states had approved the ERA.

Ceding to popular sentiment and intense lobbying by a united women's rights coalition, Congress granted a three-year, two-month extension for approval, yet not one additional state ratified the amendment in that time. By 2002, the ERA had been ratified by 35 of the necessary 38 states, and 16 states guaranteed equality of the sexes in their state constitutions. © RM, 2016. All rights reserved. Let’s Ratify the ERA: A Look at Where We Are Now: AAUW Let’s Ratify the ERA: A Look at Where We Are Now President Jimmy Carter signs an extension for the ERA ratification deadline. Image via National Archives November 05, 2015 In 1923, the Equal Rights Amendment was first proposed in the U.S. Congress. Almost a half-century later, it finally passed Congress with approval from two-thirds of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. To ratify a constitutional amendment, three-quarters of states must then agree to the proposed amendment. To date, the ERA has only been ratified by 35 of the necessary 38 states, leaving men and women unequal under the U.S. Constitution.

Why does the ERA matter? “Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t.” — Justice Antonin Scalia The ERA would guarantee constitutional equality between men and women — a concept the majority of Americans agree is necessary. In fact, most people believe the ERA has already been ratified. Although state and federal legislative champions continue to push for incremental change for women’s equality, without the protection of the ERA those laws could be changed or revoked at the whim of legislators or judges. We can’t afford to roll back the advances we’ve made on equal pay for equal work , educational equity , and so many other crucial rights for women. What does the ERA actually say? The Equal Rights Amendment is a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. Section 1: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3: This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. What’s the holdup?

When the ERA initially passed in 1972, Congress placed a seven-year deadline on the ratification process. As that deadline neared, advocates successfully extended it until 1982. As 1982 came and went the number of states that had ratified the amendment stood at 35, three short of the required 38 states for full ratification. (Note: Five states — Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, Tennessee, and South Dakota — have attempted to withdraw their ratification of the ERA. However, legal precedent and statutory language establish that withdrawal of ratification is not accepted as valid.) Where are we now? Every year, our friends in the U.S. Congress reintroduce bills to move the ERA forward. Currently, legislators are working to advance two different strategies. The “three-state strategy” ( S.J. Res. 15 / H.J. Res. 51 ), championed by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), would remove the 1982 deadline for ratification. Alternatively, the traditional “start-over strategy” ( S.J. Res. 16 / H.J. Res. 52 ), advanced by Sen.

Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and leading ERA proponent Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), would offer the text of the ERA as a new amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would then need to go through the full state ratification process. Legal scholars suggest that if three additional states do ratify the amendment, the ERA stands a good chance of acceptance. In 1992, states ratified the 27th Amendment, which was originally passed by Congress in 1789 — more than 200 years later. Regardless of the strategy advanced, state action is needed to see a way forward for ratification. There are 15 states that have still not ratified this simple but crucial amendment. During the 2015 legislative session six states — Arizona, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada, and Virginia — had bills to ratify the ERA. Not a single one of those bills made it past committee in either chamber of those statehouses. In the past, Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma have also made attempts at ratification. In 2014, the Illinois Senate passed the ERA, but it did not go to a vote in the state House.

AAUW members in these crucial states continue to capitalize on these opportunities and keep the momentum going. Related

Question: What proposed amendment was approved by Congress in 1972, and ratified by 35 of the necessary 38 states?
Answer: Equal Rights Amendment