The Senate Judiciary committee plans to hold a hearing Tuesday on the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), a constitutional amendment that received 35 of the necessary 38 states needed for ratification in the 1970s.
Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly had mobilized conservative women in opposition to the amendment in the 1970s, arguing the ERA would require women be eligible for the draft, require government-funded abortions and undermine the institution of the family.
While the amendment was eventually defeated, some Senate Democrats are hoping to resurrect the ERA, a move which multiple experts told the Daily Caller would achieve several of the transgender lobby’s biggest policy goals — such as the elimination of single-sex bathrooms, locker rooms and prisons.
“While the 1972 ERA was pending before the states, the 1977 National Women’s Conference rolled out a ‘Plan of Action’ that tied the ERA to issues such as abortion and gay rights,” Thomas Jipping, a legal scholar at The Heritage Foundation, told the Caller.
“Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex,” the text of the ERA states, adding, “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” (RELATED: Teacher Who Allegedly Suggested Kids ‘Try Being Gay’ Sued For ‘Secretly Transitioning’ Fifth Grader)
“The ERA has always been pushed by those who want to eliminate sexual distinctions,” Jipping continued. “As legislatures and courts eliminated discriminatory laws between men and women, the ERA was attached to a different agenda that includes gay rights and warnings about its impact on women’s sports, etc., were raised more than 50 years ago. It is not a coincidence, therefore, that today’s gender warriors strongly back the ERA.”
The announcement of a hearing on the ERA by Senate Judiciary Committee chair Dick Durbin was met with applause from prominent liberals, including Alyssa Milano, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley and Senator Chuck Schumer. Democrats passed a resolution in March 2021 to remove the deadline for the ERA, a resolution which was reintroduced in February 2022. Removing the deadline for ratification would dramatically ease the pathway for adoption of the ERA into the U.S. Constitution.
It’s time for the Equal Rights Amendment to be the law of the land. We’re going to get the job done.
The work continues at our full committee hearing next week. pic.twitter.com/XZuJCMVDah
— Senate Judiciary Committee (@JudiciaryDems) February 22, 2023
“The ERA is a Trojan horse that promises sex equality but hides a laundry list of unpopular policies pushed by radical trans-activists,” Jennifer Braceras, who plans to testify against the ERA in the Senate on Tuesday, told the Caller.
The ERA would essentially deem single-sex spaces illegal discrimination, Braceras explained, banning laws that stipulate certain spaces — such as bathrooms or locker rooms — are only open to biological females.
“The ERA does not define the word ‘sex,'” Braceras, who is also a member of The Federalist Society board of visitors, continued. “In 1971, it wasn’t necessary to do so. But today, activists are trying to redefine the term to include ‘gender identity’ so they can force schools to let biological males compete on women’s sports teams, require prisons to let male sex offenders self-identify into women’s facilities and mandate federal funding of puberty blockers for trans-identified teenagers.”
Tuesday’s hearing won’t be the first time Senate Democrats have sought to resurrect the national conversation regarding an equal rights amendment. Previous hearings on the ERA occurred in June 2018, April 2019 and October 2021. (RELATED: Social Worker Pressured 15-Year-Old Virginia Girl Into Aborting Baby She Meant To Carry To Term, Lawsuit Alleges)
Bamby Salcedo, president of the TransLatin@ Coalition, previously testified the ERA would “ensure no discrimination against all people, poor, indigenous, Black, Trans, Women ALL PEOPLES” and would repair “intergenerational wounds generated against the most marginalized.”
“Sold as a symbolic capstone on the equality women already enjoy in this country, the ERA will instead require the law to be totally blind to biological sex differences, treating men and women as not just equal but interchangeable or identical,” Inez Stepman, a senior policy analyst at the Independent Women’s Forum, told the Caller.
“We’ve already seen the negative consequences that ideology has caused for women and girls in the transgender context: women’s opportunities, privacy, and even safety are put in jeopardy as biological males claiming to be female invade their locker rooms, sports teams, and prison cells, with predictable results. Under a ratified ERA, any male could demand access to women’s spaces and competitions, not just those who identify as transgender,” Stepman added.
