COMMUNITY NOTED In a even more r-slurred than expected move, Biden say the ERA is ratified, Even though it isn't??? This seriously is r-slurred and beyond parody.

He's just riffing off of Trump so he doesn't get clowned too much when they go fish and eat at a diner together

Edit: More detail (too much probably)

So, this shit was proposed back in the fricking 70s, and Phyllis Schlafy created great sneed opposing it. Only in 2020 did Virginia decide to fricking ratify it-putting it over 2/3rds after it became relevant again.

The 1970s-era amendment passed by Congress would guarantee men and women equal rights under the law, but it took until 2020 for enough state legislatures to ratify it, missing a deadline set by Congress by a long shot. ERA proponents have argued that the deadline was not binding because it was in the preamble to the amendment, rather than the text of the amendment itself.

On Friday, Biden said he believed the ERA had cleared the hurdle to be added to the Constitution as its 28th Amendment when Virginia ratified it five years ago. He did not explain why he waited until the waning days of his presidency to take action.

—

The archivist said:

"In 2020 and again in 2022, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice affirmed that the ratification deadline established by Congress for the ERA is valid and enforceable. The OLC concluded that extending or removing the deadline requires new action by Congress or the courts. Court decisions at both the District and Circuit levels have affirmed that the ratification deadlines established by Congress for the ERA are valid. Therefore, the Archivist of the United States cannot legally publish the Equal Rights Amendment.

So still needs to be run through the courts.

With Virginia becoming the 38th and final state needed to ratify the ERA in 2020,16 the amendment has met all requirements of Article 5 to become an amendment and is now at a critical juncture in its history.

Not only did the president recognize the amendment's ratification, but he did so with the support of hundreds of thousands of Americans. In addition to the 38 states that ratified the ERA as the 28th amendment, more than 200,000 Americans signed a petition this week calling for this specific act to solidify constitutional equality.

Data for Progress polling from December showed 61 percent of voters would support President Biden publishing the Equal Rights Amendment and adopting it as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. And a 2020 Pew Research Center poll found that 78 percent of Americans believed that the ERA should be a part of the Constitution, even if they didn't identify as feminists.

______

Once an amendment is properly ratified, the archivist of the United States has a statutory duty to certify and publish it in the Federal Register.32 For example, when the final state necessary ratified the 27th Amendment, the U.S. archivist at the time, Don Wilson, certified it, and the next day, it was published in the Federal Register.33 Two days later, Congress passed a resolution affirming it as the 27th Amendment,34 though that was unnecessary and purely ceremonial. Archivist Wilson said:

I got a lot of pressure from members of Congress and my response was always that I feel pretty strongly this is a ministerial function, a function given to the Archivist to certify and publish once three-quarters of the states ratified. It is a bureaucratic issue, not a political one. And if I don't certify and there are 38 states that have ratified, then I'm interpreting the Constitution beyond the ministerial function given to me by Congress, and I didn't feel it was appropriate for me to do that. If I didn't publish the 27th [Amendment], then I would be playing a role not delegated to me.

>Dude, I'm just a clerk. Leave me out of this.

When Virginia ratified the ERA in 2020, instead of prompt publication, a litany of legal battles ensued. Opponents of the amendment's adoption argue that the amendment is null because the seven-year time limit Congress set in its preamble expired in the 1970s. Proponents of the ERA, on the other hand, argue that the ERA should be adopted because deadlines on the amending process are inherently unconstitutional and the seven-year time limit was not included in the version of the amendment that the states passed during ratification.

For example, the American Bar Association passed a resolution on August 6 of this year stating:

RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports the principle that any time limit for ratification of an amendment to the United States Constitution ("Constitution") is not consistent with Article V of the Constitution; FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports the principle that Article V does not permit a state to rescind its ratification of an amendment to the Constitution.3

——

SHOW MORE