Equal Rights Amendment Case Study

An essay by Phyllis Aberdeen (1972), “What’s Wrong with ‘Equal Rights’ for Women? -1972”, claimed that the modern equal rights movement was not guiding women in the right direction, it was deceiving women. Prior to the reading, I had been blind to the fact that women in America are so lucky and that in other countries women have a plethora of more jobs and responsibilities (Schlafly, P., (n.d.), para. 10. The aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid aforesaid Aberdeen stated, that in other countries women must produce their own clothes and soap by scratch, clean laundry by hand, and bear many other hardships unknown to American women. Aberdeen began the essay listing the achievements American women have made, saying that a family is the most important right belonging to a woman (Schlafly, P., (n.d.), para.

Dred Scott was born into slavery in southampton county virginia in 1795.Dred scott was owned by John emerson for quite sometime.When his owner moved to illinois Dred and his family were supposed to be given equal right along with freedom given that where they were slavery was illegal.Unfortunately this wasn’t the case and when his owner John died Dred and his lawyer went to court to fight for him and his family freedom that they were never granted and like usual they were denied twice bringing the scott family back to where they started off but only time could tell as this was decided by the constitutional law. This played a huge role in the 14th Amendment as it covers that every citizen should have their equal rights and as that was

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

I really enjoyed reading your post and completely agree with your point of view on the matter of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). The 1920’s opened the door to the idea of the ERA and individuals such as Alice Paul and the National Women’s Party paved the way to secure constitutional rights for women. The members of the Women’s Party focused their time and energy on the ERA to help in guaranteeing women constitutional protection from discrimination. Paul spent all her life advocating for these rights and well as other issues affecting women during the 20s. Paul considered herself a conservative but her vision for women had always gone beyond her own conservatism. Shortly before her death, she was quoted as saying, “I think if

Most other countries already have some kind of legal document that in some way states that men and women should have equal rights. If we want to improve our ranking among these countries, then passing the ERA is a big step in that direction. The divide is clear to see in some of the other countries that were not able to get as close as we have to having equal rights. In the countries that do have equal rights for men and women, such as Iceland, we are just catching up. This amendment is needed to ensure that our country doesn’t slip to the ways of some other countries such as Pakistan.

In order to be on the same page as other major cities across the United States, motions were made over a year ago in Houston to pass an equal rights, anti-discrimination ordinance known as the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO). At last a decision was made, and on November 3rd, 2015, HERO was struck down by 61 percent of the voters by referendum (Fernandez). The premise of the anti-discrimination ordinance is similar to those of other cities across the nation; to prevent discrimination on the bases of 15 different classes including race, age, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Houston’s mayor Annise Parker, who identifies as gay herself, was a strong supporter of the proposition for equal rights, and as all supporters in the Houston area agreed, it would put Houston on the map of inclusive and tolerant cities (Fernandez). On the other side of the argument is the conservative population of Houston. With the majority of political opinion in the Houston area being that of highly conservative leaning, HERO proved to be a controversial ordinance for many of these individuals. In an effort to increase support for opposing HERO, conservative politicians in the Houston area therefore took advantage of conservative ideals to promote a counter-position to the anti-discrimination laws (Ura).

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." That opening sentence to the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution embodied the central mission of the modern feminist movement:

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.

Sports have always been an intrical part of America's culture and society, from playing baseball in the front yard to knocking a homerun out of the ballpark, but this playing in the fields only applied to boys. Unfortunately, before Title Nine was established in 1972, there was a great deal of harassment towards women playing educational sports. This new amendment to the Civil Acts, broke down the barriers for women, and demanded proportionality between men's and women's athletic programs. Due to the way of society 35 years ago, Title Nine was necessary for women to receive equal rights in educational sports.

The progress that lead to the ratification process of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), in 1972, began over a century earlier. The advocates for women’s rights began their efforts in 1848 at the first Women’s Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, New York , where a meeting of 300 men and women was held which called for justice for women in a society that limited their privileges. By 1900, women had gained the right to keep their earnings and own property. By 1920, they had gained the right to vote. By 1963, women were paid equally to men for completing the same work. In 1964, the Civil Rights Amendment was passed and outlawed discrimination based on gender, religion, and race. In 1972, Title IX

The history of the Equal Rights Amendment can be closely related to women’s rights advocacy, that started toward the very beginning of the history of the United States dating back to the days of Abigail Adams. The United States constitution had been first interpreted as rights granted to certain white males, leaving other majority groups suppressed and working for equal rights.

In 1954 the court wrote while under earl warrens direction that the separate educational was not equal and that segregation in Kansas had denied African Americans protection under the law

The Equal Rights Amendment proposition to the United States Constitution was sent down to the state level in 1972, but was met by an organized opposition of religious conservative women trying to save the country and the family home from the secularizing transition to modernity. The ERA embodied all the fears of the conservative woman.

The ERA is a proposed amendment made to guarantee equal rights to all U.S. citizens no matter the sex. In 1872 when the issue was introduced to congress it was quickly sent out to the states to get the opinion of the amendment. Many states ratified the amendment shortly after it was sent out. The United

Women have always been the minority in the world even today: that is in the work force or even in sports. Title IX, an act that was made by the United States Congress in 1972, said that no one should be denied to play, receive financial aid, or discriminate to any education program or activity that pertains to only one sex (Senne 1). This act was a step towards improving female participation and lessening discrimination, but the stereotypes that most of society believes in still exist. This is one of the main reasons why women are discriminated when it comes to sports; by limited payroll, limited media coverage, and stereotypes.