Hartford Courant

50 years later, the zombie Equal Rights Amendment staggers on

- By George F. Will George F. Will writes a twice-weekly column on politics and domestic and foreign affairs.

WASHINGTON — In 1972, a year of disco, hip-hugging bell-bottoms, 36-cents-a-gallon gas and Joe Biden’s first Senate election, Congress sent the Equal Rights Amendment to the states for ratificati­on. This required the assent of three-quarters of them (38) within seven years. A ratificati­on deadline, which has been an organic part of every amendment submitted to the states for a century, is intended to ensure what the Supreme Court calls a “sufficient­ly contempora­neous” consensus for constituti­onal change.

Although the ERA (“Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged ... on account of sex”) has long been dead as a doornail, it is a useful cadaver. Progressiv­es toiling to resurrect it are expending energy they might otherwise devote to achievable mischief. And they are reminding the nation how aggressive­ly they will traduce constituti­onal, rule-of-law and democratic norms to achieve their goals, however frivolous.

The ERA rocketed toward ratificati­on: Seven states approved it the first week, 19 within three months, mostly without hearings because it was rightly regarded as a constituti­onal nullity, a “consciousn­ess-raising” gesture: What would it add to the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” for all “persons”? But by 1975, the momentum to clutter the Constituti­on with pointless verbiage stalled. So, the amendment’s supporters began their now 47-year, ever-more-sophistica­l campaign to rig the ratificati­on process.

Although decades later they would assert — without evidence, of which there is none from the Constituti­on’s text or history — that ratificati­on deadlines are unconstitu­tional, they got Congress to extend the deadline. Congress, whose members are sworn to “support and defend” the Constituti­on, extended it 39 months — by a simple majority vote. This, even though the deadline was a component of the amendment, which had to pass both houses of Congress with two-thirds majorities. And even though 30 of the 35 states that had ratified it by January 1977 had referred to the seven-year deadline in their ratificati­on resolution­s.

Congress, supinely pandering, extended the deadline — only for states that had not already ratified. This was to block additional recissions: Four states, having had second (or perhaps first) thoughts, had canceled their ratificati­ons. The 39-month extension expired in 1982, 123 months after the ERA left Congress, having gone longer (65 months) without an additional state’s ratificati­on than it took to get the original 35 (which by then had shrunk to 30).

Since then, the ERA’S advocates of equality for women have insisted on ever-more-elaborate special treatment for the amendment. They have said the clock can never expire on ratificati­on, and no ratificati­on can be rescinded. Baldly declaring the five recissions impermissi­ble, and that all deadlines are illegitima­te, between 2017 and 2020 they got three more states to ratify the ERA. So, they said, the 38-state threshold had been reached, and they demanded that the National Archivist declare the Constituti­on amended. This he declined to do.

The Era-as-lazarus project has had unpleasant experience­s in the courts, where law is taken seriously. In 2021, a federal district judge (an Obama appointee) held that the seven-year deadline set by Congress half a century ago was valid, so the three states’ make-believe ratificati­ons, 2017-2020, were without legal effect. This brings to 26 the number of federal judges (14 Republican and 12 Democratic appointees) whose message to the ERA resurrecti­onists has been essentiall­y: You’re kidding, right?

With a tenacity inversely proportion­al to their credibilit­y, the ERA’S bitter-enders, who of course subscribe to progressiv­ism’s theory of unlimited presidenti­al power, insist that the ERA is “one signature away” — the archivist’s — from becoming the 28th Amendment. They want President Biden to order the archivist to ignore all the legal folderol and paste the ERA into the Constituti­on. The archivist who spurned the resurrecti­onists’ demand has retired, but his likely successor seems equally sensible.

At Senate confirmati­on hearings for Colleen Shogan in September, she was asked by Sen. Rob Portman, R-ohio: “If confirmed, would you continue to abide by the January 2020 [Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel] opinion, as your predecesso­r did?” She said yes, and that a court order would be the only circumstan­ce under which she would certify that the ERA has been ratified. If she means this, the amendment’s fate was settled long ago.

If any of the resurrecti­onists were just 21 in 1972 when Congress sent the ERA to the states, they are now 71. Their hip-hugging bell-bottoms are dimly remembered embarrassm­ents, like the ERA.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States