Equal Rights Amendment

The full text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) reads as follows, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex” (qtd. in Stewart 33). These twenty-four words would become some of the most controversial of the twentieth century. Under the nineteenth amendment, American women obtained the right to vote in 1920. This amendment inspired Alice Paul to draft the first ERA which she then introduced to the United States Congress in 1923. After this first proposal, the ERA would eventually be proposed in each succeeding session of Congress (Stewart 33). Despite its introduction every year for fifty years, the ERA did not accumulate a strong opposing force until after it

Throughout history many groups have struggled to gain equal rights. A major group fighting for equality is the African Americans. Their long, hard fight had a huge spark in the 1950’s. African Americans have been denied equal rights, but found methods to deal with the inequality. The fight they face is called modern civil rights movement.

The Equal rights Amendment was proposed to set equality for every citizen no matter the sex. The amendment has three sections. The first one states “equality of rights under the law should not be denied by the U.S on the account of one's sex.” Section two says that “congress has the power to enforce this law.” Last but not least, section three says the amendment will take effect two years after ratification.

Current laws to prevent sex discrimination just aren’t enough. The federal laws and regulations contain many loopholes and they are inconsistently interpreted, or even ignored. Women who seek enforcement of these laws must not only convince the courts that discrimination has occurred, but that it even matters. An Equal Rights Amendment would not only guarantee equality, it would take the burden off women fighting discrimination and hold those who discriminate accountable.

The Equal Rights Amendment is a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that declares the “Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” To propose an amendment, ⅔ of both the Houses need to vote. To ratify an amendment, ¾ of state legislatures need to agree. In 1972, Congress passed the ERA and approved it for

The Equal Protection Clause derives from the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifies “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws…” As a part of the Reconstruction Amendments, the aforementioned clause was meant to ensure racial equality in the Reconstruction Period and has been applied successfully against the affirmative action. Introduced in United States v. Carolene Products Co., the strict scrutiny has been applied to the cases, in which a fundamental constitutional rights have been infringed or a government action applies to a suspect classification (i.e. race, religion, national background). Specifically, in regards to Bakke v. Regents of University of California, the Supreme Court (“the Court”) concluded that, considering that the University of California, Davis received several Caucasian applicants for its special admission program in 1973 and 1974 and that none of the applicants received the admission to the program since the start, the program unfairly administered in favor of minority races and, therefore, violated the rights of the white applicants under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, from Hopwood v. State of Texas, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled under strict scrutiny that, the affirmative action imposed by the University of Texas School of Law (“the law school”) violates the Fourteenth Amendment since neither the law school nor the University of Texas system has proved a proof of

For quite a long time, women have wanted to receive the same treatment as men. When African American men were able to vote, women wanted to be able to vote as well. When World War II was in progress, women would work in the factories while their husbands, brothers and fathers were fighting in the war. Women were tired of being treated differently and not having the same rights as men, so they wanted to conceive an amendment that would force people to treat them as equally as men and anyone else. This amendment was called the Equal Rights Amendment. On March 22, 1972, the equal rights amendment, E.R.A., was passed by the United States Senate and was sent to the states for ratification. Thirty states ratified the amendment but then a

Since the 1920’s, women have been fighting for equal rights. Women’s groups spent decades working to pass laws that would ban gender discrimination. Finally, in 1972, the Equal Rights Amendment was passed by Congress even though

The Equal Rights Amendment has struggled immensely to be enacted since its introduction to Congress in 1923. It is an amendment with a simple goal: give women equal rights. It seems like that would be easily passed, but there was a lot of opposition that heavily criticized and misconstrued the intentions of the amendment. The opponents’ rationale for their beliefs is very interesting, because their main arguments are simply not true. Using false information to misinform the public is unfortunately a very common occurrence, and it is important that the truth is available and the lies are openly debunked. By simply looking at the amendment, it is clear that opponents to it are lying to instill fear into the public.

The Equal Rights Amendment was formed to combat legal sex discrimination. The act seeks to end discrimination between women and men in terms of property, divorce, and employment rates along with many other matters. Many supporters of the ERA marched, rallied, and committed acts of civil disobedience just to show awareness, but little did many know they were part taking in a historical continuum in the fight for equality (Francis, Roberta W.).

Recently, in the year 2013, there was a case brought to the Supreme Court’s attention that was first trialed in the district court. That case’s name was Fisher vs. University of Texas. It was in this case that the plaintiff, Abigail N. Fisher filed suit against the University of Texas with the claim that the University had violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 13th Amendment. The main question that arose in the question was, “does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions”. The overall decision of the Supreme Court was that the University of Texas hadn’t violated the Equal Protection Clause, and in fact that they were permitted to consider race in the admissions process. I do agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. I agree with said decision because the argument made by the plaintiff Fisher was weak, and the rights of life and liberty weren’t in any way tampered with in the admissions process that the University of Texas was going through in the situation suited.

Freedom and civil rights have always been a thorn in America history for a long time ago. Racial unfairness and humanity deprivation was what most colored American people suffered most back in the day. Although the government aimed and worked for equality among every citizen, there is no point to deny that it has failed countless time in the past. However, just because the government failed to acknowledge the rights of colored citizens doesn’t mean that it can stay that way forever and that exactly what the Supreme Court did in the case of Loving V Virginia.

The Equal Rights Amendment was created to give equal rights to both female and male because they weren’t getting treated equally. Women didn’t have the same rights as males, one of them was voting and during that time it was a really big problem in the U.S. Also, because there was so much sex discrimination like females weren’t getting the respect they should and they would treat them so bad, because women couldn’t vote, own

An important provision of the Bill of Rights is the protection of freedom to publish, as provided by the First Amendment. This protection applies to all kinds of publications, even those that print unpopular opinions. In most censorship cases, every attempt is made to suppress the written word after publication, not before. Minnesota passed a law in 1925 that sought to prevent newspapers, magazines, and other publications from printing obscene, malicious, scandalous and defamatory material. This law was called the Minnesota Gag Law . This law allowed private citizens and/or public prosecutors to request a court injunction to shut down any publication that was known as a public nuisance. Publishers of newspapers had to show that they had good motives for anything they were going to print before they printed it.

The Equal Rights Amendment; first proposed by the National Women's Party in congress in 1923, was sent to the states in March 1972 and was the second amendment to fail at being ratified. Originally the deadline to pass or fail the amendment was 7 years, but that was extended to ten years. The final deadline was on June 30, 1982. It was meant to equalize men and women’s rights and it goes as follows: “Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.” One other amendment like the Equal Rights Amendment was the "Lucretia Mott Amendment” proposed by Alice Paul in 1923 at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention which read: "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction” and the "Alice Paul Amendment" written by Alice Paul in 1943. The amendment was eventually passed but in the form of the 19th amendment.