Law Commons^™

The Equal Rights Amendment And The Equality Act: Talking Points, Center For Gender And Sexuality Law

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

The Equal Rights Amendment, first proposed nearly 100 years ago, is still needed today.

• The ERA is a constitutional amendment that would protect against discrimination on the basis of sex—including on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.
• The ERA would also usher in advancements in sex equality in all three branches of government, empower advocates, and encourage recognition of related forms of discrimination such as pregnancy discrimination.
• By including the ERA in our Constitution, the United States would catch up with the more than 100 other countries with constitutional protections against sex-based discrimination.

Faq On The Current Status Of The Equal Rights Amendment To The U.S. Constitution, Center For Gender And Sexuality Law

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Several measures have been introduced into the U.S. Congress this session that relate to the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). One is a resolution that would lift the deadline for ratification of the ERA that was passed by Congress in 1972, and the other is a new ERA that would begin a new process of amending the Constitution to add explicit protections for sex equality. This FAQ is designed to explain what each of these measures would do and the legal complexities that surround them.

The Puzzles And Possibilities Of Article V, David E. Pozen, Thomas P. Schmidt

Faculty Scholarship

Legal scholars describe Article V of the U.S. Constitution, which sets forth rules for amending the document, as an uncommonly stringent and specific constitutional provision. A unanimous Supreme Court has said that a “mere reading demonstrates” that “Article V is clear in statement and in meaning, contains no ambiguity, and calls for no resort to rules of construction.” Although it is familiar that a small set of amendments, most notably the Reconstruction Amendments, elicited credible challenges to their validity, these episodes are seen as anomalous and unrepresentative. Americans are accustomed to disagreeing over the meaning of the constitutional text, but …