Open main menu

Wikipedia β

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution designed to guarantee equal rights for all citizens regardless of sex; it seeks to end the legal distinctions between men and women in terms of divorce, property, employment, and other matters.[1] The ERA was originally written by Alice Paul and Crystal Eastman. The amendment was introduced in Congress for the first time in 1923 and has prompted conversations about the meaning of equality for women and men. In its early history, middle-class women were largely supportive, while those speaking for the working class were often opposed, arguing that employed women needed special protections regarding working conditions and employment hours. With the rise of the women's movement in the United States in the 1960s, the ERA garnered increasing support, and, after being reintroduced by Representative Martha Griffiths (D-MI), in 1971, it passed both houses of Congress in 1972 and was submitted to the state legislatures for ratification.

Congress had originally set a ratification deadline of March 22, 1979. Through 1977, the amendment received 35 of the necessary 38 state ratifications. With wide, bipartisan support (including that of both major political parties, both houses of Congress, and Presidents Ford and Carter)[2] it seemed headed for ratification until Phyllis Schlafly mobilized conservative women in opposition, arguing that the ERA would disadvantage housewives and cause women to be drafted into the military.[3] Four states rescinded their ratifications before the 1979 deadline; however, there is no precedent or mechanism within the US Constitution for rescinding, and, thus, it becomes a legal question. In 1978, a joint resolution of Congress extended the ratification deadline to June 30, 1982, but no further states ratified the amendment before that revised deadline.

On March 22, 2017, the 45th anniversary of Congress's submission of the amendment to the states, the Nevada Legislature was the first to ratify the ERA after the expiration of the original deadline.[4]

Contents

TextEdit

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.[5][6]

BackgroundEdit

 
Alice Paul toasting (with grape juice) the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. August 26, 1920[7]

On the 75th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention, July 1, 1923, feminist and advocate for women's rights Alice Paul announced that she planned on promoting and initiating an amendment to the United States Constitution that would give the same rights to men and women.[8] She believed that the Nineteenth Amendment would not be enough to ensure that men and women were treated equally regardless of sex. Paul wrote a draft and in honor of Lucretia Mott, a female abolitionist who fought for women's rights and attended the First Women's Rights Convention, Paul named the amendment Mott's Amendment.[9] The original amendment stated:

Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[10]

In 1943, Alice Paul further revised the amendment's wording; this text became Section 1 in the version passed by Congress in 1972.[11]

That wording was based on that of the Fifteenth Amendment and Nineteenth Amendments.

As a result, in the 1940s, ERA opponents proposed an alternative, which provided that “no distinctions on the basis of sex shall be made except such as are reasonably justified by differences in physical structure, biological differences, or social function.” It was quickly turned down by both pro and anti-ERA coalitions.[12]

Feminists splitEdit

Since the 1920s, the Equal Rights Amendment has caused a sharp debate among feminists about the meaning of women's equality. It was "feminist against feminist", said historian Judith Sealander.[13] Alice Paul and her National Woman's Party was the leading proponent, arguing that women should be on equal terms with men in all regards, even if that means sacrificing certain benefits given to women through protective legislation, such as shorter work hours and no night work or heavy lifting.[14] Opponents of the amendment, such as the Women's Joint Congressional Committee, believed that these gender-based benefits protected women and that the loss of such protection would not be worth the supposed gain in equality. In general, middle-class elements supported the ERA, and working-class elements (and the labor movement) opposed it.[15] In 1924, The Forum hosted a debate between Doris Stevens and Alice Hamilton concerning these two perspectives on the proposed amendment.[16] Their debate reflected the wider tension in the developing feminist movement of the early 20th century between two approaches towards the equality of gender. One approach emphasized shared similarities between the sexes and demanded rights based on women's humanity. The other approach emphasized women's unique experiences and how they were different from men to obtain recognition for their specific needs.[17] The crusade against the ERA on behalf of working class women was led by Mary Anderson and the Women's Bureau beginning in 1923. These feminists argued that legislation including mandated minimum wages, safety regulations, restricted daily and weekly hours, lunch breaks, and maternity provisions would be more beneficial to the majority of women who were forced to work out of economic necessity, not personal fulfillment.[18] The debate over the ERA also drew from struggles between working class and professional women. Alice Hamilton said, in her speech “Protection for Women Workers,” that the ERA would strip working women of the small protections they had achieved, and leave them powerless to further improve their condition in the future, or attain necessary protections in the present.[19]

The National Woman's Party already had tested its approach in Wisconsin, where it won passage of the Wisconsin Equal Rights Law in 1921.[20][21] It then took the ERA to Congress in the 1920s, where Senator Charles Curtis, a future Vice President, and Representative Daniel R. Anthony, Jr.Susan B. Anthony's nephew, both Kansas Republicans, introduced it for the first time as Senate Joint Resolution No. 21 on December 10, 1923, and as House Joint Resolution No. 75 on December 13, 1923, respectively. Though the ERA was introduced in every congressional session between 1923 and 1970, it almost never reached the floor of either the Senate or the House for a vote—instead, it was usually blocked in committee; except in 1946, when it was defeated in the Senate by a vote of 38 to 35—not receiving the required two-thirds vote.

Hayden rider and protective labor legislationEdit

In 1950 and 1953, the ERA was passed by the Senate with a provision known as "the Hayden rider", introduced by Arizona Senator Carl Hayden. The Hayden rider added a sentence to the ERA to keep special protections for women: "The provisions of this article shall not be construed to impair any rights, benefits, or exemptions now or hereafter conferred by law upon persons of the female sex." By allowing women to keep their existing and future special protections, it was expected that the ERA would be more appealing to its opponents. Though opponents were marginally more in favor of the ERA with the Hayden rider, supporters of the original ERA believed it negated the amendment's original purpose -- causing the amendment not to be passed in the House.[22][23][24]

ERA supporters were hopeful that the second term of Dwight Eisenhower would advance their agenda. Eisenhower had publicly promised to "assure women everywhere in our land equality of rights," and in 1958, President Dwight Eisenhower asked a joint session of Congress to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, the first president to show such a level of support for the amendment. However, the National Woman's Party found the amendment to be unacceptable and asked it to be withdrawn whenever the Hayden rider was added to the ERA.[25]

The Republican Party included support of the ERA in its platform beginning in 1940, renewing the plank every four years until 1980.[26] The ERA was strongly opposed by the American Federation of Labor and other labor unions, who feared the amendment would invalidate protective labor legislation for women. The Equal Rights Amendment was also opposed by Eleanor Roosevelt and most New Dealers. They felt that ERA was designed for middle class women but that working class women needed government protection. They also feared that the ERA would undercut the male-dominated labor unions that were a core component of the New Deal coalition. Most northern Democrats, who aligned themselves with the anti-ERA labor unions, opposed the amendment.[26] The ERA was supported by southern Democrats and almost all Republicans.[26]

At the 1944 Democratic National Convention, the Democrats made the divisive step of including the ERA in their platform, but the Democratic Party did not become united in favor of the amendment until congressional passage in 1972.[26] The main support base for the ERA until the late 1960s was among middle class Republican women. The League of Women Voters, formerly the National American Woman Suffrage Association, opposed the Equal Rights Amendment until 1972, fearing the loss of protective labor legislation.

1960sEdit

At the Democratic National Convention in 1960, a proposal to endorse the ERA was rejected after it met explicit opposition from liberal groups including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the AFL–CIO, labor unions such as the American Federation of Teachers, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), the American Nurses Association, the Women's Division of the Methodist Church, and the National Councils of Jewish, Catholic, and Negro Women.[27] The losing side then demanded that presidential candidate John F. Kennedy announce his support of the ERA; he did so in an October 21, 1960, letter to the chairman of the National Woman's Party.[28] When Kennedy was elected, he made Esther Peterson the highest-ranking woman in his administration as an Assistant Secretary of Labor. Peterson publicly opposed the Equal Rights Amendment based on her belief that it would weaken protective labor legislation.[29] Peterson referred to the National Woman's Party members, most of them veteran suffragists and preferred the "specific bills for specific ills" approach to equal rights.[29] Ultimately, Kennedy's ties to labor unions meant he and his administration did not support the ERA.[30]

As a concession to feminists, Kennedy appointed a blue-ribbon commission on women, the President's Commission on the Status of Women, to investigate the problem of sex discrimination in the United States. The commission was chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt who opposed the ERA but no longer spoke against it. In the early 1960s, Roosevelt announced that, due to unionization, she believed the ERA was no longer a threat to women as it once may have been and told supporters that they could have the amendment if they wanted it. However, she never endorsed the ERA. The commission she chaired reported (after her death) that no ERA was needed.[31] The commission helped win passage of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 which banned sex discrimination in wages in a number of professions (it would later be amended in the early 1970s to include the professions it initially excluded) and secured an executive order from Kennedy eliminating sex discrimination in the civil service. The commission, made largely of anti-ERA feminists with ties to labor, proposed remedies to the widespread sex discrimination it unearthed and in its 1963 final report held that on the issue of equality "a constitutional amendment need not now be sought".[32]

The commission established state and local commissions on the status of women and arranged for follow-up conferences in the years to come. The following year, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned workplace discrimination not only on the basis of race, religion, and national origin, but also on the basis of sex, thanks to the lobbying of Alice Paul and Coretta Scott King and the skillful politicking of Representative Martha Griffiths of Michigan.

A new women's movement gained ground in the later 1960s as a result of a variety of factors: Betty Friedan's bestseller The Feminine Mystique; the network of women's rights commissions formed by Kennedy's national commission; the frustration over women's social and economic status; and anger over the lack of government and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement of the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In June 1966, at the Third National Conference on the Status of Women in Washington, D.C., Betty Friedan and a group of activists frustrated with the lack of government action in enforcing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act formed the National Organization for Women to act as an "NAACP for women", demanding full equality for American women and men. In 1967, at the urging of Alice Paul, NOW endorsed the Equal Rights Amendment. The decision caused some union Democrats and social conservatives to leave the organization and form the Women's Equity Action League (within a few years WEAL also endorsed the ERA), but the move to support the amendment benefited NOW, bolstering its membership. By the late 1960s NOW had made significant political and legislative victories and was gaining enough power to become a major lobbying force. In 1969, newly elected Representative Shirley Chisholm of New York gave her famous speech "Equal Rights for Women" on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Congressional passageEdit

 
U.S. Representative Martha Griffiths championed the ERA

In February 1970, NOW picketed the United States Senate, a subcommittee of which was holding hearings on a constitutional amendment to lower the voting age to eighteen. NOW disrupted the hearings and demanded a hearing on the Equal Rights Amendment and won a meeting with Senators to discuss the ERA. That August, over 20,000 American women held a nationwide Women's Strike for Equality protest to demand full social, economic, and political equality.[33] Said Friedan of the strike, "All kinds of women's groups all over the country will be using this week on August 26 particularly, to point out those areas in women's life which are still not addressed. For example, a question of equality before the law; we are interested in the Equal Rights Amendment." Despite being centered in New York City—which was regarded as one of the biggest strongholds for NOW and other groups sympathetic to the women's liberation movement such as Redstockings[34]—and having a small number of participants in contrast to the large-scale anti-war and civil rights protests that had occurred in the recent time prior to the event,[33] the strike was credited as one of the biggest turning points in the rise of second-wave feminism.[34]

In Washington, D.C., protesters presented a sympathetic Senate leadership with a petition for the Equal Rights Amendment at the U.S. Capitol. Influential news sources such as Time also supported the cause of the protestors.[33] Soon after the strike took place, activists distributed literature across the country as well.[34] In 1970, congressional hearings began on the ERA.

On August 10, 1970, Michigan Democrat Martha Griffiths successfully brought Alice Paul's ERA to the House Floor, after fifteen years of bringing the bill to the House Judiciary Committee without success. The bill passed in the House and continued on to the Senate, which voted for the ERA with an added clause that women would be exempt from the military. The session of Congress ended before the bill could go any further.[35]

Griffiths reintroduced the ERA, and achieved success on Capitol Hill with her House Joint Resolution No. 208, which was adopted by the House on October 12, 1971, with a vote of 354 yeas (For), 24 nays (Against) and 51 not voting.[36] Griffiths's joint resolution was then adopted by the Senate on March 22, 1972, with a vote of 84 yeas, 8 nays and 7 not voting.[37] The Senate version, drafted by Senator Birch Bayh of Indiana,[38] passed after the defeat of an amendment proposed by Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina that would have exempted women from the draft.[26] President Richard Nixon immediately endorsed the ERA's approval upon its passage by the 92nd Congress.[26]

Contemporary movement on the ERA began in 2013, when Senators Ben Cardin of Maryland and Mark Kirk of Illinois, along with Congresswoman Jackie Speier of California, introduced identical bills in both the US Senate and House chambers to remove the ratification deadline altogether. Currently, the legislation continues to gain co-sponsors in both chambers in anticipation of completion of the amendment.

Actions in the state legislaturesEdit

RatificationsEdit

In 1972, the ERA was sent to the states, with a seven-year deadline to get 38 states to ratify the amendment. Most states were eager to pass the legislation; in 1972, 22 states ratified the amendment and eight more joined in 1973. Between 1974 and 1977, only five states approved the ERA, and advocates became worried about the approaching March 22, 1979 deadline.[39] At the same time, the legislatures of four states which had ratified the ERA then adopted legislation purporting to rescind those ratifications. If, indeed, a state legislature has power to rescind, then the ERA actually had ratifications by only 31 states—not 35—when March 22, 1979 arrived.

The ERA has been ratified by the following states:[40]

  1. Hawaii (March 22, 1972)
  2. New Hampshire (March 23, 1972)
  3. Delaware (March 23, 1972)
  4. Iowa (March 24, 1972)
  5. Idaho (March 24, 1972)
  6. Kansas (March 28, 1972)
  7. Nebraska (March 29, 1972)
  8. Texas (March 30, 1972)
  9. Tennessee (April 4, 1972)
  10. Alaska (April 5, 1972)
  11. Rhode Island (April 14, 1972)
  12. New Jersey (April 17, 1972)
  13. Colorado (April 21, 1972)
  14. West Virginia (April 22, 1972)
  15. Wisconsin (April 26, 1972)
  16. New York (May 18, 1972)
  17. Michigan (May 22, 1972)
  18. Maryland (May 26, 1972)
  19. Massachusetts (June 21, 1972)
  20. Kentucky (June 26, 1972)
  21. Pennsylvania (September 27, 1972)
  22. California (November 13, 1972)
  23. Wyoming (January 26, 1973)
  24. South Dakota (February 5, 1973)
  25. Oregon (February 8, 1973)[41]
  26. Minnesota (February 8, 1973)
  27. New Mexico (February 28, 1973)
  28. Vermont (March 1, 1973)
  29. Connecticut (March 15, 1973)
  30. Washington (March 22, 1973)
  31. Maine (January 18, 1974)
  32. Montana (January 25, 1974)
  33. Ohio (February 7, 1974)
  34. North Dakota (March 19, 1975)
  35. Indiana (January 18, 1977)[42]
  36. Nevada (March 22, 2017), despite the ratification deadline expiring decades earlier.[43]

Ratifications rescindedEdit

Legislators in the following states voted to rescind their earlier ratification of the ERA:[44]

  1. Nebraska (March 15, 1973 – Legislative Resolution No. 9)
  2. Tennessee (April 23, 1974 – House Joint Resolution No. 371 and Senate Joint Resolution No. 29)
  3. Idaho (February 8, 1977 – Senate Joint Resolution No. 133 and House Concurrent Resolution No. 10)
  4. Kentucky (March 17, 1978 – House (Joint) Resolution No. 2 and House (Joint) Resolution No. 20)
    The Lieutenant Governor of Kentucky, Thelma Stovall, who was acting as governor in the governor's absence, vetoed the rescinding resolution.[45]

The Constitution is silent regarding whether the governor of a state has any authority regarding whether that state ratifies an amendment to the Constitution. The Constitution is likewise silent regarding a state's authority to rescind its ratification of a proposed, but not yet adopted, constitutional amendment.[46]

Refusal to recognize deadline extension to June 30, 1982Edit

On March 1, 1979, the South Dakota Legislature approved Senate Joint Resolution No. 2 which, while not going quite so far as to rescind South Dakota's 1973 ratification of ERA, stipulated that the ERA's opportunity for ratification—by any state of the Union—would expire on March 22, 1979. Furthermore, Senate Joint Resolution No. 2 made clear that South Dakota's own ratification of the ERA would no longer be valid after March 22, 1979, and that any ratification of the ERA after that date in any other state would be considered by South Dakota to be null and void.

Non-ratifying states with one-house approvalEdit

At various times, in 8 of the 14 non-ratifying states, one house of the legislature approved the ERA. It failed in those states because both houses of a state's legislature must approve during the same session for that state to ratify.

  1. Florida – whose House of Representatives voted to ratify the ERA on March 24, 1972, with a tally of 91 to 4; a second time on April 10, 1975, with a tally of 62 to 58; a third time on May 17, 1979, with a tally of 66 to 53; and a fourth time on June 21, 1982, with a tally of 60 to 58.[47]
  2. Illinois – whose Senate voted to ratify the ERA in May 1972 with a tally of 30 to 21, and again on May 22, 2014 (Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment No. 75)[48] with a tally of 39 to 11;[49] and whose House of Representatives voted to ratify the ERA on May 1, 1975 with a tally of 113 to 62, and again on May 21, 2003 with a tally of 76 to 41 (House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment No. 1). At various times, votes were conducted in both houses of the Illinois General Assembly on the question of ratifying the ERA and while most members voted in favor of ratification, the result was always less than the three-fifths supermajority vote in each house of the Illinois General Assembly for ratification as required by the internal parliamentary rules of both the Illinois Senate and the Illinois House of Representatives. A provision of the Illinois State Constitution, which had required a supermajority of three-fifths in both legislative chambers, was found to be unconstitutional by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in the 1975 case of Dyer v. Blair.[50][51] Since then, the ERA has been voted on multiple times, but has only ever passed in one of the chambers. The most recent vote in favor of the ERA was in the state senate in May 2014 with a tally of 39 to 11, and 6 voting present.[52]
  3. Louisiana – whose Senate voted to ratify the ERA on June 7, 1972, with a tally of 25 to 13.
  4. Missouri – whose House of Representatives voted to ratify the ERA on February 7, 1975, with a tally of 82 to 75.[53]
  5. North Carolina – whose House of Representatives voted to ratify the ERA on February 9, 1977, with a tally of 61 to 55.[54]
  6. Oklahoma – whose Senate voted to ratify the ERA on March 23, 1972, by a voice vote.[55]
  7. South Carolina – whose House of Representatives voted to ratify the ERA on March 22, 1972, with a tally of 83 to zero.
  8. Virginia – whose Senate voted to ratify the ERA on February 7, 2011, with a tally of 24 to 16 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 357); a second time on February 14, 2012, with a tally of 24 to 15 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 130); a third time on February 5, 2014, with a tally of 25 to 8 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 78); a fourth time on February 5, 2015, with a tally of 20 to 19 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 216);[56] and a fifth time on January 26, 2016, with a tally of 21 to 19 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 1).[57]

Over the past twenty years, ratification resolutions have also been defeated in Arizona, Arkansas,[58] and Mississippi.[59][60][61]

Congressional extension of ratification deadlineEdit

In 1978—as the 1979 deadline approached—the 95th Congress adopted House Joint Resolution No. 638 (H. J. Res. 638), by Representative Elizabeth Holtzman of New York, which purported to extend the ERA's ratification deadline to June 30, 1982.[62] H. J. Res. 638 received less than two-thirds of the vote (a simple majority, not a supermajority) in both the House of Representatives and the Senate; for that reason, ERA supporters deemed it necessary that H. J. Res. 638 be transmitted to then President Jimmy Carter for signature as a safety precaution. Carter signed the joint resolution, though he questioned—on procedural grounds—the propriety of his doing so.[63] During this disputed extension, no additional states ratified or rescinded.

 
President Carter signing the extension

No additional states ratified the ERA during that extra period of slightly more than three years. On June 18, 1980, a resolution in the Illinois House of Representatives resulted in a vote of 102-71 in favor, but Illinois required a three-fifths majority on constitutional amendments and so the measure failed by five votes. In 1982, seven female ERA supporters went on a fast and seventeen chained themselves to the door of the Illinois senate chamber; none of this resulted in any state ratifications.[64][65][66] The closest the ERA came to gaining an additional ratification between the original deadline of March 22, 1979 and the revised June 30, 1982, expiration date was when it was approved by the Florida House of Representatives on June 21, 1982. In the final week before the deadline, that ratifying resolution was defeated in the Florida Senate by a vote of 16 yeas and 22 nays. Even if Florida had ratified the ERA, the proposed amendment would still have been two states short of the required 38 (seven states short if the rescissions were valid).

According to research by Professor Jules B. Gerard, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, of the 35 legislatures that passed ratification resolutions, 24 explicitly referred to the 1979 deadline.[67]

In the courtsEdit

On December 23, 1981, in Idaho v. Freeman, the United States District Court for the District of Idaho ruled that the rescissions—all of which occurred before the original 1979 ratification deadline—were valid and that the ERA's deadline extension was unconstitutional.[68] The National Organization for Women appealed both rulings. On October 4, 1982, in NOW v. Idaho, 459 U.S. 809 (1982), the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling in Idaho v. Freeman and declared the entire matter moot on the grounds that the ERA was dead for the reason given by the Administrator of General Services that the ERA had not received the required number of ratifications (38), so that "the Amendment has failed of adoption no matter what the resolution of the legal issues presented here."[69][70]

Support for the ERAEdit

Supporters of the ERA point to the lack of a specific guarantee in the Constitution for equal rights protections on the basis of sex.[71] In 1973, future Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg summarized a supporting argument for the ERA in the American Bar Association Journal:

The equal rights amendment, in sum, would dedicate the nation to a new view of the rights and responsibilities of men and women. It firmly rejects sharp legislative lines between the sexes as constitutionally tolerable. Instead, it looks toward a legal system in which each person will be judged on the basis of individual merit and not on the basis of an unalterable trait of birth that bears no necessary relationship to need or ability.[72]

In the early 1940s both the Democratic and Republican parties added support for the ERA to their platforms.[73]

The National Organization for Women (NOW) and ERAmerica, a coalition of almost 80 organizations, led the pro-ERA efforts. Between 1972 and 1982, ERA supporters held rallies, petitioned, picketed, went on hunger strikes, and performed acts of civil disobedience.[39] On July 9, 1978, NOW and other organizations hosted a national march in Washington D.C., which garnered over 100,000 supporters, and was followed by a Lobby Day on July 10.[74] On June 6, 1982, NOW sponsored marches in states that had not passed the ERA including Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, and Oklahoma.[75] Key feminists of the time, such as Gloria Steinem, spoke out in favor of the ERA, arguing that ERA opposition was based on gender myths that overemphasized difference and ignored evidence of unequal treatment between men and women.[76]

Black Women and the ERAEdit

Many black women supported the ERA since they felt impacted by both race and sex discrimination.[77] One prominent black female supporter was black Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm. On August 10, 1970, she gave a speech on the ERA called “For the Equal Rights Amendment” in Washington D.C. In her speech, she talked about how widespread sex discrimination had become and how the ERA would address that. She also said that laws to protect women in the workforce from unsafe working conditions would also be needed by men, and thus the ERA would help all people.[78]

Other black women at the time supported the ERA for similar reasons. By 1976, 60% of black women and 63% of black men were in favor of the ERA, and the legislation was supported by black organizations such as the NAACP, National Council of Negro Women, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, National Association of Negro Business, and the National Black Feminist Organization.[77]

Opposition to the ERAEdit

 
Anti-ERA women watching a committee meeting of the Florida Senate in 1979, where consideration of the ERA was postponed, thus effectively killing the resolution for the 1979 session

Opponents of the ERA focused on traditional gender roles, such as how men do the fighting in wartime. They argued that the amendment would eliminate the men-only draft requirement and guarantee the possibility that women would be subject to conscription and be required to have military combat roles in future wars if it were passed. Defense of traditional gender roles proved to be a useful tactic. In Illinois, supporters of Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative Republican activist from Illinois, used traditional symbols of the American housewife. They took homemade bread, jams, and apple pies to the state legislators, with the slogans, "Preserve us from a congressional jam; Vote against the ERA sham" and "I am for Mom and apple pie."[79] They appealed to married women by stressing that the amendment would repeal protective laws such as alimony and eliminate the tendency for mothers to obtain custody over their children in divorce cases.[80] It was suggested that single-sex bathrooms would be eliminated and same-sex couples would be able to get married if the amendment were passed.[81] Traditional women started to oppose the ERA.[82] Schlafly said the ERA was designed for the benefit of young career women and warned that if men and women had to be treated identically it would threaten the security of middle-aged housewives with no job skills. They could no longer count on alimony or Social Security.[81] Opponents also argued that men and women were already equal enough with the passage of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964,[83] and that women's colleges would have to admit men. Her argument that protective laws would be lost resonated with working-class women.[84]

 
Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative activist, organized opposition to the ERA and argued that it "would lead to women being drafted by the military and to public unisex bathrooms"[85]

At the 1980 Republican National Convention, the Republican Party platform was amended to end its support for the ERA.[86] The most prominent opponent of the ERA was Schlafly. Leading the Stop ERA campaign, Schlafly defended traditional gender roles and would often bait feminists by opening her speeches with lines like, "I'd like to thank my husband for letting me be here tonight—I always like to say that, because it makes the libs so mad."[87] When Schlafly began her campaign in 1972, public polls showed support for the amendment was widely popular and thirty states had ratified the amendment by 1973. After 1973, the number of ratifying states slowed to a trickle. Support in the states that had not ratified fell below 50%.[88] Critchlow and Stachecki argue that public opinion in key states shifted against the ERA as opponents, operating on the local and state levels, won over the public. The state legislators in battleground states followed public opinion in rejecting the ERA.

Experts agree that Phyllis Schlafly was a key player in the defeat. Political scientist Jane Mansbridge in her history of the ERA argues that the draft issue was the single most powerful argument used by Schlafly and the other opponents to defeat ERA.[89] She concludes, "Many people who followed the struggle over the ERA believed—rightly in my view—that the Amendment would have been ratified by 1975 or 1976 had it not been for Phyllis Schlafly's early and effective effort to organize potential opponents."[90] Legal scholar Joan C. Williams argues, "ERA was defeated when Schlafly turned it into a war among women over gender roles."[91] Historian Judith Glazer-Raymo argues:

As moderates, we thought we represented the forces of reason and goodwill but failed to take seriously the power of the family values argument and the single-mindedness of Schlafly and her followers. The ERA's defeat seriously damaged the women's movement, destroying its momentum and its potential to foment social change....Eventually, this resulted in feminist dissatisfaction with the Republican Party, giving the Democrats a new source of strength that when combined with overwhelming minority support, helped elect Bill Clinton to the presidency in 1992 and again in 1996.[92]

Many ERA supporters blamed their defeat on special interest forces, especially the insurance industry and conservative organizations, suggesting they funded an opposition that subverted the democratic process and the will of the pro-ERA majority.[93] They argued that while the public face of the anti-ERA movement was Phyllis Schlafly and her STOP ERA organization, there were other important groups in the opposition as well, such as the powerful National Council of Catholic Women, labor feminists, and (until 1973) the AFL–CIO. Opposition to the amendment was particularly high among religious conservatives, who argued that the amendment would guarantee universal abortion rights and the right for homosexual couples to marry.[94][95] Critchlow and Stachecki say the anti-ERA movement was based on strong support among Southern whites, Evangelical Christians, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, and Roman Catholics, including both men and women.[96] Sonia Johnson, a traditionally raised Mormon housewife whose eventual feminist advocacy for the ERA's passage led to her excommunication by the LDS church, subsequently wrote about her experiences in the memoir From Housewife to Heretic. (Johnson and others led a hunger strike/fast at the Illinois state senate building in an effort to push Illinois toward ratification before the deadline of 1982.)

Post-deadline ratificationsEdit

Beginning in the mid 1990s, ERA proponents began an effort to win ratification of the ERA by the legislatures of states that did not ratify it between 1972 and 1982. These proponents claim that Congress can remove the ERA's ratification deadline despite the deadline having expired, allowing the states again to ratify it. They also claim that the ratifications ERA previously received remain valid.[97] Proponents of the three-state strategy have promoted ratification resolutions in the legislatures of most of the 15 states that never ratified the ERA before the time limit on its ratification expired.[98]

On June 21, 2009, the National Organization for Women decided to support both efforts to obtain new ratifications and any strategy to submit a new ERA to the states for ratification.[99]

In 2013, the Library of Congress's Congressional Research Service issued a report saying that ratification deadlines are a political question:

ERA proponents claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Coleman v. Miller gives Congress wide discretion in setting conditions for the ratification process.

It also says:

Revivification opponents caution ERA supporters against an overly broad interpretation of Coleman v. Miller, which, they argue, may have been be [sic] a politically influenced decision.[100]

However, most recently, ERA Action has both led and brought renewed vigor to the movement by instituting what has become known as the "three state strategy".[101] It was in 2013 that ERA Action began to gain traction with this strategy through their coordination with Senate and House members not only to introduce legislation in both chambers to remove the ratification deadline, but also in gaining legislative sponsors. The Congressional Research Service then issued a report on the "three state strategy" on April 8, 2013 entitled "The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues",[102] stating that the approach was viable.

In 2014, under the auspices of ERA Action and their coalition partners, both the Virginia and Illinois state senates voted to ratify the ERA; however, votes were blocked in both states' House chambers. In the meantime, the ERA ratification movement continued with the resolution being introduced in 10 state legislatures.[103][104][105] Then, on March 22 2017, the Nevada legislature became the first state in 40 years to ratify the ERA,[106] and Illinois began to see movement again as well.[107]

Subsequent congressional actionEdit

The amendment has been reintroduced in every session of Congress since 1982. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) championed it in the Senate from the 99th Congress through the 110th Congress. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) introduced the amendment symbolically at the end of the 111th Congress and has supported it in the 112th Congress. In the House of Representatives, Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) has sponsored it since the 105th Congress,[108] most recently in August 2013.[109]

In 1983, the ERA passed through House committees with the same text as in 1972; however, it failed by six votes to achieve the necessary two-thirds vote on the House floor. That was the last time that the ERA received a floor vote in the Congress.[110]

At the start of the 112th Congress on January 6, 2011, Senator Menendez, along with Representatives Maloney, Jerrold Nadler and Gwen Moore, held a press conference advocating for the Equal Rights Amendment's adoption.[111]

The 113th Congress had a record number of women. On March 5, 2013, the ERA was reintroduced by Senator Menendez as S. J. RES. 10.[112][113]

The "New ERA" introduced in 2013, sponsored by Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, adds an additional sentence to the original text: "Women shall have equal rights in the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction."[114]

Proposed removal of ratification deadlineEdit

On March 8, 2011, the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day, Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) introduced legislation (H.J.Res. 47) to remove the congressionally imposed deadline for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment.[115] Bill co-sponsors include Representatives Robert Andrews (D-NJ), Jackie Speier (D-CA), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Chellie Pingree (D-ME) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL). On March 22, 2012, the 40th anniversary of the ERA's congressional approval, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD) introduced (S.J. Res. 39)—which is worded with slight differences from Representative Baldwin's (H.J. Res. 47). Senator Cardin was joined by ten other Senators who added their names to the Senate Joint Resolution.[116]

On February 24, 2013, the New Mexico House of Representatives passed a resolution asking that the congressionally imposed deadline for ERA ratification be removed.[117][118] The resolution was officially received by the U.S. House of Representatives on April 25, 2013, and was referred to the House's Committee on the Judiciary, as noted in the Congressional Record.[119]

State Equal Rights AmendmentsEdit

Twenty-four states have adopted constitutions or constitutional amendments providing that equal rights under the law shall not be denied because of sex. Most of these provisions mirror the broad language of the ERA, while the wording in others resembles the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.[120] Of course, the state actions do not change the federal draft laws that proved one of the stumbling blocks to passage of the national ERA. The 1879 Constitution of California contains the earliest state equal rights provision on record. Narrowly written, it limits the equal rights conferred to "entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment". Near the end of the 19th century two more states, Wyoming (1890) and Utah (1896), included equal rights provisions in their constitutions. These provisions were broadly written to ensure political and civil equality between women and men.[121] Several states crafted and adopted their own equal rights amendments during the 1970s and 1980s, while the ERA was before the states, or afterward.

Some state Equal Rights Amendments and original constitutional equal rights provisions are:[121][122]

Alaska – No person is to be denied the enjoyment of any civil or political right because of race, color, creed, sex or national origin. The legislature shall implement this section. Alaska Constitution, Article I, §3 (1972)

California – A person may not be disqualified from entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment because of sex, race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin. California Constitution, Article I, §8 (1879)

Colorado – Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the state of Colorado or any of its political subdivisions because of sex. Colorado Constitution, Article II, §29 (1973)

Connecticut - No person shall be denied the equal protection of the law nor be subjected to segregation or discrimination in the exercise or enjoyment of his or her civil or political rights because of religion, race, color, ancestry, national origin, sex or physical or mental disability. Connecticut Constitution, Article I, §20 (1984)

Illinois - The equal protection of the laws shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex by the State or its units of local government and school districts. Illinois Constitution, Article I, §18 (1970)

Iowa – All men and women are, by nature, free and equal and have certain inalienable rights—among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness. Iowa Constitution, Article I, §1 (1998)

Maryland – Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex. Maryland Constitution, Declaration of Rights, Article 46 (1972)

Massachusetts - All people are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin. Massachusetts Constitution, Part 1, Article 1 as amended by Article CVI by vote of the People, (1976)

Montana – Individual dignity. The dignity of the human being is inviolable. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. Neither the state nor any person, firm, corporation, or institution shall discriminate against any person in the exercise of his civil or political rights on account of race, color, sex, culture, social origin or condition, or political or religious ideas. Montana Constitution, Article II, §4 (1973)

Oregon - Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the state of Oregon or by any political subdivision in this state on account of sex. Oregon Constitution, Article I, §46 (2014)

Utah – The rights of citizens of the State of Utah to vote and hold office shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex. Both male and female citizens of this State shall enjoy all civil, political and religious rights and privileges. Utah Constitution, Article IV, §1 (1896)

Wyoming – In their inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, all members of the human race are equal. Since equality in the enjoyment of natural and civil rights is only made sure through political equality, the laws of this state affecting the political rights and privileges of its citizens shall be without distinction of race, color, sex, or any circumstance or condition whatsoever other than the individual incompetency or unworthiness duly ascertained by a court of competent jurisdiction. The rights of citizens of the state of Wyoming to vote and hold office shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex. Both male and female citizens of this state shall equally enjoy all civil, political and religious rights and privileges. Wyoming Constitution, Articles I and VI (1890)

See alsoEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ Olson, James S.; Mendoza, Abraham O. (2015-04-28). American Economic History: A Dictionary and Chronology: A Dictionary and Chronology. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 9781610696982. 
  2. ^ Miller, Eric C. (2015-06-19). "Phyllis Schlafly's "Positive" Freedom: Liberty, Liberation, and the Equal Rights Amendment". Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 18 (2): 277–300. ISSN 1534-5238. 
  3. ^ "New Drive Afoot to Pass Equal Rights Amendment". www.washingtonpost.com. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  4. ^ Colin Dwyer; Carrie Kaufman (March 21, 2017). "Nevada Ratifies The Equal Rights Amendment ... 35 Years After The Deadline". NPR. Retrieved March 28, 2017. 
  5. ^ 86 Stat. 1523
  6. ^ "Proposed Amendments Not Ratified by States" (PDF). United States Government Printing Office. Retrieved June 1, 2013. 
  7. ^ "Who Was Alice Paul?". Alice Paul Institute. Retrieved April 6, 2017. 
  8. ^ Congressional Research Service. The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues
  9. ^ ""Lucretia Mott" National Park Service". National Park Service. United States Government. Retrieved March 21, 2016. 
  10. ^ "Who was Alice Paul". Alice Paul Institute. Retrieved 2016-02-02. 
  11. ^ "Equal Rights Amendments, 1923-1972". history.hanover.edu. Retrieved 2016-09-23. 
  12. ^ Davis, Flora (1999-01-01). Moving the Mountain: The Women's Movement in America Since 1960. University of Illinois Press. ISBN 9780252067822. 
  13. ^ Judith Sealander, "Feminist Against Feminist: The First Phase of the Equal Rights Amendment Debate, 1923-1963", South Atlantic Quarterly (1982) 81#2 pp 147-161
  14. ^ Nancy Cott, "Feminist Politics in the 1920s: The National Woman's Party", Journal of American History (1984( 71#1 pp: 43-68. in JSTOR
  15. ^ Nancy Cott, "Historical Perspectives: The Equal Rights Amendment Conflict in the 1920s". in Marianne Hirsch and Evelyn Fox Keller eds., Conflicts in Feminism, (Routledge, 1990) ch 2.
  16. ^ Susan Ware, ed., "New Dilemmas for Modern Women", Modern American Women: A Documentary History (McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 1997)
  17. ^ Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (Yale University Press, 1987)
  18. ^ Dorothy Sue Cobble, The Other Women's Movement: Workplace Justice and Social Rights in Modern America, (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2004), 51.
  19. ^ Genora Johnson Dollinger, “Women and Labor Militancy,” in Susan Ware, ed. Modern American Women: A Documentary History, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), 125-126.
  20. ^ Genevieve G. McBride, "'Forward' Women: Winning the Wisconsin Campaign for the Country's First ERA, 1921" in Peter G. Watson Boone, ed., The Quest for Social Justice III: The Morris Fromkin Memorial Lectures, 1992–2002 (Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2005)
  21. ^ Keetley, Dawn; Pettegrew, John, eds. (2005). Public Women, Public Words: A Documentary History of American Feminism, Volume II: 1900 to 1960. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 284–5. 
  22. ^ "Conversations with Alice Paul: Woman Suffrage and the Equal Rights Amendment.". cdlib.org. Suffragists Oral History Project. 
  23. ^ "What's in a Name? Does it matter how the Equal Rights Amendment is worded?". jofreeman.com. 
  24. ^ Cynthia Ellen Harrison (1989). On Account of Sex: The Politics of Women's Issues, 1945-1968. University of California Press. pp. 31–32. 
  25. ^ Cynthia Ellen Harrison (1989). On Account of Sex: The Politics of Women's Issues, 1945-1968. University of California Press. pp. 31–32. 
  26. ^ a b c d e f Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp. 245–248. ISBN 0-465-04195-7. 
  27. ^ Jo Freeman (2002). A Room at a Time: How Women Entered Party Politics. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 209. ISBN 978-0-8476-9805-9. 
  28. ^ Kennedy, John F (October 21, 1960). "Letter to Mrs. Emma Guffey Miller, Chairman of the National Woman's Party". ucsb.edu. 
  29. ^ a b "Peterson, Esther Eggertsen". Facts on File History Database. Infobase Learning. 
  30. ^ Joseph M. Siracusa (2012). Encyclopedia of the Kennedys: The People and Events That Shaped America. ABC-CLIO. p. 864. 
  31. ^ Maurine Hoffman Beasley (1987). Eleanor Roosevelt and the Media: A Public Quest for Self-fulfillment. University of Illinois Press. p. 184. 
  32. ^ Keetley, Dawn; Pettegrew, John, eds. (2005). Public Women, Public Words: A Documentary History of American Feminism, Volume III: 1960 to the Present. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 251. 
  33. ^ a b c Nation, Women on Time (New York), September 7, 1970 Archived April 6, 2015, at the Wayback Machine.
  34. ^ a b c Voichita Nechescu (June 5, 2006). Becoming The Feminist Subject. Conscious-Raising Groups in Second Wave Feminism. Proquest. p. 209. ISBN 0542771683. Retrieved April 1, 2014. 
  35. ^ "GRIFFITHS, Martha Wright | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives". history.house.gov. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  36. ^ 117 Congressional Record 35815
  37. ^ "Congressional record". archive.org. 
  38. ^ Cruikshank, Kate. "The Art of Leadership: A Companion to an Exhibition from the Senatorial Papers of Birch Bayh, United States Senator from Indiana, 1963–1980". Indiana University. Retrieved 10 February 2013. 
  39. ^ a b "ERA: History". www.equalrightsamendment.org. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  40. ^ Gladstone, Leslie W. CRS Report 85-154 GOV: The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment. p. 33.
  41. ^ Tara Watson and Melody Rose, "She Flies With Her Own Wings: Women in the 1973 Oregon Legislative Session", Oregon Historical Quarterly (2010) 111#1 pp 38-63.
  42. ^ MacPherson, Myra; MacPherson, Myra (1977-01-19). "Indiana Ratifies the ERA - With Rosalynn Carter's Aid". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2017-03-22. 
  43. ^ "Nevada ratifies Equal Rights Amendment decades past deadline". Las Vegas Now. March 22, 2017. Retrieved March 22, 2017. 
  44. ^ Hatch, Orrin G. (1983). "The Equal Rights Amendment: Myths and Realities".
  45. ^ "ERA Supporter Vetoes Resolution". The Tuscaloosa News. 21 March 1978. Retrieved 2016-11-01 – via Google News. 
  46. ^ "Authentication and Proclamation: Proposing a Constitutional Amendment". Justia. Retrieved July 20, 2014. 
  47. ^ Joan S. Carver, "The Equal Rights Amendment and the Florida Legislature", Florida Historical Quarterly (1982) 60#4 pp 455-481.
  48. ^ "Illinois General Assembly - Bill Status for SJRCA0075". www.ilga.gov. Retrieved 2016-07-13. 
  49. ^ "State of Illinois General Assembly Vote on Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment No. 75" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 11, 2016. Retrieved May 25, 2017. 
  50. ^ Nancy Douglas Joyner, "Coalition politics: A case study of an organization's approach to a single issue". Women & Politics (1982) 2#1-2 pp: 57-70. Abstract
  51. ^ [1]
  52. ^ "State of Illinois General Assembly Vote on Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment No. 75" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 11, 2016. Retrieved May 25, 2017. 
  53. ^ Harriett Woods, Stepping Up to Power: The Political Journey of American Women (2000); memoir of ERA leader in Missouri legislature
  54. ^ Donald G. Mathews and Jane S. De Hart, Sex, Gender, and the Politics of ERA: A State and the Nation (1992) focus on debate in North Carolina
  55. ^ Wilbur J. Scott, "The equal rights amendment as status politics". Social Forces (1985) 64#2 pp: 499-506.
  56. ^ Patricia W. Goodman, "The ERA in Virginia: A Power Playground", Southern Exposure (1978) 6#3 pp 59-62.
  57. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2016-02-03. Retrieved 2016-01-27. 
  58. ^ Janine A. Parry, "What Women Wanted": Arkansas Women's Commissions and the ERA", Arkansas Historical Quarterly (2000) 59#3 pp: 265-298. in JSTOR
  59. ^ Martha H. Swain; et al. (2010). Mississippi Women: Their Histories, Their Lives. U of Georgia Press. p. 289. 
  60. ^ Will, George F. (February 13, 1994). "Night of the Living Dead Amendment" (PDF). Washington Post via National Right to Life Committee. Retrieved 2014-01-05. 
  61. ^ Francis, Roberta W. "Frequently Asked Questions". Alice Paul Institute. Retrieved 2009-08-14. 
  62. ^ Volume 92, United States Statutes At Large, page 3799
  63. ^ Equal Rights Amendment - Extension of ratification deadline Archived October 19, 2013, at the Wayback Machine.
  64. ^ O'Dea, Suzanne (1999). From Suffrage to the Senate: An Encyclopedia of American Women in Politics, Volume 1. ABC-CLIO. p. 244. 
  65. ^ Nicholson, Zoe Ann (2004). The Hungry Heart: A Woman's Fast for Justice. Lune Soleil Press. ISBN 0972392831. 
  66. ^ Sheppard, Nathaniel (June 24, 1982). "Women say they'll end fast but not rights fight". The New York Times. Retrieved September 18, 2016. 
  67. ^ Letter to House Judiciary Committee, June 14, 1978
  68. ^ State of Idaho v. Freeman, 529 F. Supp. 1107 (D. Idaho 1982).
  69. ^ Memorandum of Gerald P. Carmen, Administrator of General Services, July 1982.
  70. ^ "Now v. Idaho". eagleforum.org. 
  71. ^ "ERA: Why". www.equalrightsamendment.org. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  72. ^ Ginsburg, Ruth Bader. “The Need for the Equal Rights Amendment.” American Bar Association Journal, vol. 59, no. 9, 1973, pp. 1013–1019. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25726416.
  73. ^ "ERA: History". www.equalrightsamendment.org. Retrieved 2017-04-11. 
  74. ^ "July 9, 1978: Feminists Make History With Biggest-Ever March for the Equal Rights Amendment | Feminist Majority Foundation Blog". feminist.org. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  75. ^ Times, Winston Williams, Special To The New York (1982-06-07). "THOUSANDS MARCH FOR EQUAL RIGHTS". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  76. ^ ""All Our Problems Stem from the Same Sex Based Myths": Gloria Steinem Delineates American Gender Myths during ERA Hearings". historymatters.gmu.edu. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  77. ^ a b SEDWICK, CATHY; WILLIAMS, REBA (1976-01-01). "BLACK WOMEN AND THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT". The Black Scholar. 7 (10): 24–29. 
  78. ^ "Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm, "For the Equal Rights Amendment" (10 August 1970)". archive.vod.umd.edu. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  79. ^ Rosenberg, Rosalind (2008). Divided Lives: American Women in the Twentieth Century. Hill & Wang. p. 225. 
  80. ^ Rhode, Deborah L. (2009). Justice and Gender: Sex Discrimination and the Law. Harvard University Press. pp. 66–67. 
  81. ^ a b "New Drive Afoot to Pass Equal Rights Amendment". www.washingtonpost.com. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  82. ^ "The Equal Rights Amendment". ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association. 
  83. ^ "Digital History". www.digitalhistory.uh.edu. Retrieved 2017-04-13. 
  84. ^ Rosenberg, Rosalind (2008). Divided Lives: American Women in the Twentieth Century. Hill & Wang. pp. 225–26. 
  85. ^ Eilperin, Juliet. "New Drive Afoot to Pass Equal Rights Amendment". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 22, 2010. 
  86. ^ Perlez, Jane (May 17, 1984). "Plan to omit rights amendment from platform brings objections". New York Times. Retrieved July 24, 2013. 
  87. ^ Critchlow, p. 247
  88. ^ Jane J. Mansbridge, Why we lost the ERA (University of Chicago Press, 1986) p 214.
  89. ^ Jane Mansbridge, "Who's in Charge Here? Decision by Accretion and Gatekeeping in the Struggle for the ERA", Politics & Society (1984) 13#4 pp 343-382.
  90. ^ Mansbridge, Why we lost the ERA (1986) p 110.
  91. ^ Williams, Joan (1999). Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What To Do About It. Oxford UP. p. 147. 
  92. ^ Glazer-Raymo, Judith (2001). Shattering the Myths: Women in Academe. Johns Hopkins UP. p. 19. 
  93. ^ Critchlow and Stachecki (2008). The Equal Rights Amendment Reconsidered. pp. 157-8
  94. ^ Francis, Roberta W. "The History Behind the Equal Rights Amendment". equalrightsamendment.org. Alice Paul Institute. Retrieved 2014-01-04. 
  95. ^ David W. Brady and Kent L. Tedin, "Ladies in Pink: Religion and Political Ideology in the Anti-ERA Movement", Social Science Quarterly (1976) 56#4 pp 564-75
  96. ^ Critchlow and Stachecki (2008). The Equal Rights Amendment Reconsidered. p. 160
  97. ^ Francis, Roberta W. "The Three-State Strategy". equalrightsamendment.org. Alice Paul Institute in collaboration with the ERA Task Force of the National Council of Women's Organizations. Retrieved April 25, 2014. 
  98. ^ "Memorandum: Equal Rights Amendment: Ratification Issues", by David C. Huckabee. Specialist in American National Government, Government Division, The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service. March 18, 1996
  99. ^ "2009 National NOW Conference Resolutions: Equal Rights Amendment". National Organization for Women. June 21, 2009. Archived from the original on 2009-08-12. Retrieved 2009-08-14. 
  100. ^ Neale, Thomas H. (May 9, 2013), The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues (PDF), Congressional Research Service 
  101. ^ Held, Herndon, and Stager, Allsion, Sheryl, and Danielle (1997). "The Equal Rights Amendment: Why the ERA Remains Legally Viable And Properly Before the States" (PDF). William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law. 3:113: 113–136. 
  102. ^ Neale, Thomas (9 May 2013). "The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues" (PDF). Retrieved 25 May 2017. Congressional Research Service 
  103. ^ "ERA: Home". www.equalrightsamendment.org. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  104. ^ "Nevada Ratifies The Equal Rights Amendment ... 35 Years After The Deadline". NPR.org. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  105. ^ Brown, Matthew Hay. "As women march in D.C., Cardin co-sponsors new Equal Rights Amendment". baltimoresun.com. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  106. ^ says, Quora. "Let's Ratify the ERA: A Look at Where We Are Now". AAUW: Empowering Women Since 1881. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  107. ^ "Illinois at center of revived Equal Rights Amendment fight". Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved 2017-04-06. 
  108. ^ "The Equal Rights Amendment: 111th Congress" (PDF). maloney.house.gov. July 13, 2009. 
  109. ^ "Bill Summary & Status 113th Congress (2013 - 2014) H.J.RES.56". loc.gov. Library of Congress. 
  110. ^ Randall, Vicky (1987). Women and Politics: An International Perspective. University of Chicago Press. p. 308. 
  111. ^ "As Constitution is read aloud, Maloney, Menendez, Nadler, Moore cite need for Equal Rights Amendment". maloney.house.gov (Press release). January 6, 2011. Retrieved April 22, 2015. 
  112. ^ "Bill Text 113th Congress (2013-2014) S.J.RES.10.IS". loc.gov. Library of Congress. 
  113. ^ Gray, Kaili Joy (March 7, 2013). "Democrats re-re-re-reintroduce Equal Rights Amendment ... but shhhh, don't tell anyone". dailykos.com. 
  114. ^ Neuwirth, Jessica (2015). Equal Means Equal. New York: The New Press. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-62097-039-3. 
  115. ^ "U.S. Rep. Baldwin: Seeks to speed ratification of Equal Rights Amendment". wispolitics.com. Retrieved 2011-03-08. 
  116. ^ "All Bill Information (Except Text) for S.J.Res.39 - A joint resolution removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment". congress.gov. 
  117. ^ 51st Legislature, State of New Mexico, First Session, 2013, House Memorial 7 (PDF) 
  118. ^ "Roundhouse roundup, Feb. 11, 2013". Las Cruces Sun-News. Archived from the original on 2014-02-03. 
  119. ^ 113th Congress, 1st Session, "Congressional Record" (PDF), congress.gov (Vol. 159, No. 58), p. H2352 
  120. ^ Gladstone, Leslie (August 23, 2004). "Equal Rights Amendment: State Provisions" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved June 19, 2015. 
  121. ^ a b Leslie W. Gladstone (August 23, 2004). "Equal Rights Amendments: State Provisions" (PDF). CRS Report for Congress. Congressional Research Service - The Library of Congress. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 15, 2015. 
  122. ^ "VoteERA.org Equal Rights Amendment Women's Full Equality". VoteERA.org Equal Rights Amendment Women's Full Equality. 

Further readingEdit

  • Baldez, Lisa; Epstein, Lee; Martin, Andrew D. (2006). "Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment?". Journal of Legal Studies. 35 (1): 243–283. doi:10.1086/498836. 
  • Bradley, Martha S. (2005). Pedestals and Podiums: Utah Women, Religious Authority, and Equal Rights. Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books. ISBN 1-56085-189-9. 
  • Critchlow, Donald T. (2005). Phyllis Schlafly and Grassroots Conservatism: A Woman's Crusade. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-07002-4. 
  • Critchlow, Donald T., and Stachecki, Cynthia L. (2008). "The Equal Rights Amendment Reconsidered: Politics, Policy, and Social Mobilization in a Democracy", Journal of Policy History Volume 20, Number 1 online
  • Dunlap, Mary C. (1976) "The Equal Rights Amendment and the Courts". Pepperdine Law Review Volume 3, Number 1 online
  • Hatch, Orrin G. (1983). The Equal Rights Amendment: Myths and Realities, Savant Press.
  • Kempker, Erin M. (2013) "Coalition and Control: Hoosier Feminists and the Equal Rights Amendment". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 34.2 (2013): 52-82. online
  • Lee, Rex E. (1980). A Lawyer Looks at the Equal Rights Amendment. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press. ISBN 0-8425-1883-5. 
  • Mansbridge, Jane J. (1986). Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-50358-5. 
  • McBride, Genevieve G. (2005). "'Forward' Women: Winning the Wisconsin Campaign for the Country's First ERA, 1921.". In Peter Watson Boone (ed.). The Quest for Social Justice III. Milwaukee, WI: UW-Milwaukee. ISBN 1-879281-26-0. 
  • Neale, T. H. (2013). The proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary ratification issues (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service) online

External linksEdit