The resolution's decision to clarify the lapsed status of West Virginia's ratification has significant implications for state laws advocating gender equality and women's rights. Specifically, it establishes that West Virginia's legislature no longer formally supports the ratification of the ERA after the specified date. This could potentially undermine claims for stronger legal protections against gender discrimination within the state, as any interpretation of the ratified amendment's enforceability would be hindered by this resolution. Opponents of the ERA argue that additional legislative measures are unnecessary given existing federal protections, while proponents view this resolution as a setback in the ongoing fight for gender equality.
Summary
Senate Concurrent Resolution 44 (SCR44) was introduced in West Virginia on February 10, 2022, with the primary objective of clarifying the status of the state's ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the United States Constitution. This resolution asserts that the ratification, which occurred in 1972 by West Virginia's 60th Legislature, is only valid through March 22, 1979, thereby indicating that any ongoing claims of ratification beyond that date are invalid. The resolution aims to reaffirm the understanding that the ERA's effective ratification period was limited and acknowledges a specific constitutional timeline regarding the amendment's approval process by state legislatures across the United States.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SCR44 is noticeably polarized among stakeholders. Supporters argue that the resolution accurately reflects the legal timeline of the ERA and serves to protect the integrity of legislative practices. They assert that the original ratification was bound by the deadlines set by Congress, and thus reaffirming this point is crucial for clarity in the legal landscape. Conversely, opponents decry this move as a regression for women's rights, signaling a reluctance to fortify gender equality through constitutional means. This debate highlights the broader cultural and political divisions surrounding gender issues in contemporary society.
Contention
Notably, the resolution faced significant opposition, evidenced by the voting history where it was rejected by a vote of 75 nays to 18 yeas on February 14, 2022. This outcome suggests that a substantial portion of the legislative body either supports an active push toward the ratification of the ERA or believes in the value of maintaining a live ratification status. Critics of the resolution view it as an unnecessary clarification that undermines the principles of gender equality, while supporters maintain it aligns with historical legislative intent regarding the ERA's ratification timeline.
Clarifying that the 1972 ratification by the 62nd Texas Legislature, 2nd Called Session, of the proposed 1972 Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was only valid through March 22, 1979.
Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing one or more amendments to the constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and to limit the terms of office of federal officials and members of Congress.
Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing one or more amendments to the constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and to limit the terms of office of federal officials and members of Congress.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii State Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.