Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

niyad

(113,628 posts)
Wed Mar 21, 2012, 07:52 PM Mar 2012

a history of the Equal Rights Amendment

History of the ERA: 19th Century

In the wake of the Civil War, the 13th Amendment eliminated slavery, the 14th Amendment declared that no state could abridge the privileges and immunities of U.S citizens, and the 15th Amendment guaranteed the right to vote regardless of race. Feminists of the 1800s fought to have these amendments protect the rights of all citizens, but the 14th Amendment includes the word "male" and together they explicitly protect only men's rights.
History of the ERA: 20th Century

. . . .

In 1923, Alice Paul wrote the "Lucretia Mott Amendment," which said, "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction." It was introduced annually in Congress for many years. In the 1940s, she rewrote the amendment. Now called the "Alice Paul Amendment," it required "equality of rights under the law" regardless of sex.


The 1970s Struggle to Pass the ERA

The ERA finally passed the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives in 1972. Congress included a seven-year deadline for ratification by three-fourths of the states, meaning that 38 of the 50 states had to ratify by 1979. Twenty-two states ratified in the first year, but the pace slowed to either a few states per year or none. In 1977, Indiana became the 35th state to ratify the ERA. Amendment author Alice Paul died the same year.
. . . .




The states that have not ratified the ERA are: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia.

(and look at how many of those states are passing woman-hating anti-choice bills, vaginal ultrasound bills, etc. some things never change)

http://womenshistory.about.com/od/equalrightsamendment/a/equal_rights_amendment_overview.htm

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
a history of the Equal Rights Amendment (Original Post) niyad Mar 2012 OP
I found the last 3 paragraphs the most interesting ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2012 #1
as I recall, this was the only amendment that ever had a time limit on it niyad Mar 2012 #2

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
1. I found the last 3 paragraphs the most interesting
Wed Mar 21, 2012, 10:50 PM
Mar 2012
How the States Voted or Failed to Vote

The thirty-five states that ratified the amendment are: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Five of those states rescinded their ratifications for various reasons. There is some question as to the legitimacy of the rescissions. This is partly due to the question of whether the states were only rescinding incorrectly worded procedural resolutions but still ratifying the amendment, and partly due to the issue of whether ERA questions are moot because the deadline has passed. The five states that rescinded their ratifications are: Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, Tennessee, and South Dakota.

The states that have not ratified the ERA are: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia.


The time limit and the states that changed their votes are going to make this very messy. From what I have read, constitutional scholarship has widely diverse opinions on it. It would be cleaner to start over and make sure the rules about changing votes and time limits are clear and unambiguous. I also understand why some may think that is a bad approach.
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Women's Rights & Issues»a history of the Equal Ri...