Share this page!

ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
Twitter logo
7 Mar, 5 tweets, 4 min read
Step right up! See the wondrous transformation of the ERA resolution (H.J.Res.17)! Introduced Jan. 21 under Congress's Article V powers, properly crafted by congressional attorneys to require 2/3 vote in each house. But now, in dead of night, in the blink of an eye-- transformed! Image
Here you see the original H.J. Res. 17, as introduced with trumpets Jan. 21, 2021. We invite you to carefully examine the "Resolved" clause-- drafted by congressional staff specialists, initiates in their arcane craft, to properly reflect the Article V requirement for 2/3 votes. ImageImage
Now, do not blink... shazam! H.J. Res. 17, transformed! The number, the date, they've not changed--and yet, the pesky constitutional 2/3 requirement is no more! Only the tiny star, barely noticeable, conveying meaning only to initiates, reveals the visit of the stealthy magician! ImageImage
It is a wonder! See here the official, publicly accessible Congress-dot-gov history of "all actions" on H.J.Res. 17--a log that usually records even the most inconsequential procedural mini-steps. Yet, it betrays no evidence of the vanishing spell cast by the Star-Print Wizard. Image
So then, what manner of sorcery is at work here, and to what shadowy ends? We are glad you asked. Please see this earlier thread for the backstory.
#EqualRightsAmendment
@gtconway3d
@fedjudges
@varadmehta
@nrlc
@SBAList
@TomJipping
@JoshMBlackman

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with ERA_No_Shortcuts

ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ERANoShortcuts

ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
8 Mar
ABORTION AND THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT:
A THREAD

With the U.S. House of Representatives slated to vote on an ERA "deadline removal" measure (H.J.Res. 17) the week of March 15, 2021, it is timely to review one of the main reasons the level of support for
#equalrightsamendment
the language of the 1972 ERA has dropped so precipitously in the "People's House"--the house that is apportioned on the basis of population, and in which every member stands for election every 2 years. In 1971, 94% of House members voted for the ERA Resolution (H.J.Res. 208).
But when the House Democratic majority leadership attempted a "start-over" ERA (same language) in 1983, it failed on the House floor (11-15-83), drawing 65% support, short of 2/3 needed (14 cosponsors nay). Single biggest reason: the ERA-abortion link had become evident to many.
Read 25 tweets
ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
6 Mar
In new CNN piece @VeronicaStrac, sharply contrasting assessments of the 3-5-21 ERA deadline ruling by Judge Rudolph Contreras. CNN says the judge "dealt a blow to advocates of the ERA" by upholding the deadline and rejecting late actions by VA, IL, and NV.
cnn.com/2021/03/06/pol…
Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life said Democrats in Congress & state AGs are on "a political-pressure campaign to intimidate the federal courts into permitting them to air-drop the long-expired ERA into the Constitution, [but] a federal judge appointed by President Obama ImageImage
ignored the political pressures and unflinchingly enforced the Constitution." But Katherine Franke of the ERA Project at Columbia Law School said, "Yesterday's ruling is not really a setback for sex equality or the ERA, rather it renews our focus on the bill Image
Read 4 tweets
ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
15 Jun 20
1/16) BREAKING NEWS: A major development in the main ERA ratification case, VIRGINIA v. FERRIERO, filed in Washington, D.C. Federal District Judge Rudolph Contreras (Obama appointee) has GRANTED the motion of Alabama (+LA,NE,SD,TN) to intervene in the case --
#ERA
#ERANow
2/16) i.e, become parties themselves. This is the case in which Virginia, Illinois, and Nevada sued the Archivist, arguing that the 1972 ERA has already been ratified, and that the ratification deadline imposed by Congress was unconstitutional.
#ERA2020
#ERAYes
3/16) The judge's order, entered over opposition from VA, IL, NV, is a big win for ERA skeptics. It substantially increases the likelihood that major legal issues surrounding the viability of the 1972 ERA (e.g., whether the 1972 ERA in fact died decades ago,
Read 16 tweets
ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
11 Feb 20
"The Equal Rights Amendment 2020" is a stage-magic show -- a glitzy production, playing now in the media, Congress, and the courts. The real ERA is 40 years dead. What you see now is a political hologram -- it looks real, but you can walk right thru it. Let's take a closer look!
In 1972,the 92nd Congress, by the required 2/3 votes, approved the ERA Resolution (H.J. Res. 208). Like every proposed constitutional amendment since the First Congress, it contained a Proposing Clause--which is not a "preamble," but required under Article V of the Constitution.
Congress need not include a deadline in a Proposing Clause, but the Supreme Court has said it can do so and they're binding. The ERA Proposing Clause had a 7-year deadline for ratification--just like Proposing Clauses of the 23rd, 24th, 25th, & 26th Amts, & failed D.C. proposal.
Read 10 tweets
ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
8 Jan 20
The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which advises the Executive Branch on major legal issues, today issued a 38-page opinion that the 1972 ERA is dead and cannot be resurrected by state legislatures or Congress. Further details will follow here at @ERANoShortcuts. Image
This opinion defines the position of the Executive Branch. It means that the Archivist of the United States may not certify the ERA as part of the Constitution, after Virginia submits "ratification" papers, because there has been no ERA actually before the states since 1979. Image
The opinion is posted on the Office of Legal Counsel website at this URL:
justice.gov/olc/file/12325…

#ERA_No_Shortcuts
Read 5 tweets
ERA_No_Shortcuts Profile picture
7 Jan 20
A pro-ERA group called "Equal Means Equal" today filed a federal lawsuit arguing that the Constitution does not allow any time limit on ratification of any amendment to the Constitution, nor does it allow any state to rescind its ratification.

news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-re…
Of the various theories cooked up to try to re-animate the 40-year-expired 1972 Equal Rights Amendment, this one is the wackiest. Under this theory, there must be endless time to ratify any proposed constitutional amendment, and once a state is "in the bag," it can never escape!
In an April 29, 2019 letter to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Prof. Michael S. Paulsen, a leading expert on ratification issues, called the deadlines-prohibited theory "legally preposterous--utterly meritless to the point of foolishness." A sure loser in higher courts. ImageImageImage
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @ERANoShortcuts has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @ERANoShortcuts!

Read all threads by @ERANoShortcuts