Lawmakers push ratification of 1972 Equal Rights Amendment

Posted February 14

Democratic lawmakers have introduced the Equal Rights Amendment that was proposed in 1972.

— North Carolina would ratify the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution under bills filed in both the state House and the state Senate Tuesday.

Congress sent the ERA to the states in 1972. The amendment, which would guarantee equal rights for women, eventually died after it fell three states short of the 38 it needed to ratify it. North Carolina was one of 15 states that declined to ratify the amendment at the time.

Sen. Floyd McKissick, D-Durham, and Rep. Carla Cunningham, D-Mecklenburg, are the primary sponsors of bills filed Tuesday, but Cunningham acknowledged during a news conference that the measures may not be received well in the Republican-controlled General Assembly, particularly because the deadline for ratification has passed by several decades.

Present-day supporters of the ERA often point to a legal analysis published in 1997 that suggests how Congress could circumvent the ERA's expiration date. Its authors argue precedents regarding time limits in previous amendment ratifications and the potential for Congress to adjust the initial time limit on the ERA’s ratification make the amendment viable if they can get three more states to ratify it.

Lawmakers back ERA ratification

McKissick said the Women’s March on Washington and similar demonstrations around the nation that gathered millions of protesters show an increased concern for women's rights nationally.

"There is now a desire and enthusiasm to do something that is significant," McKissick said. "Perhaps this is the point in time we can capitalize on it."

The main points of contention over the ERA deal less with acknowledging women's equality and more with the what opponents see as the amendment's collateral implications. For example, opponents fear the amendment would mean women would have to register with Selective Service along with men, courts and legislators could view it as giving women the right to abortion and businesses could be pressed to immediately raise salaries for their female workers.

"If you hear people talk about, 'If we pass it, it's going to have a major impact on business and what they have to pay,' then so be it," McKissick said. "If that's the criteria to use for evaluation, I guess they would have never abolished slavery either."

1 Comment

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • John Jones Feb 15, 2017
    user avatar

    What equal rights are they asking for? Isn't everyone treated equally anyway? Most of the women protesting didn't even know why they were protesting for.