(PatriotNews.net) – In a stunning legal rebuke, a federal court has rejected Joe Biden’s claim that the long-expired Equal Rights Amendment is part of the Constitution.
At a Glance
- The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed claims that the Equal Rights Amendment is ratified.
- Joe Biden and some Democratic leaders continue to assert the ERA should be part of the Constitution.
- The legal and procedural barriers to certifying the ERA as an amendment remain substantial.
- The Archivist of the United States refuses to certify the ERA without new congressional action.
Legal and Historical Background
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was first introduced in Congress in 1923, aimed at ensuring equal rights for all citizens regardless of sex. It gained momentum in the 1970s, when Congress approved it with a seven-year deadline for ratification, later extended by three more years. However, by 1982, the ERA fell short by three states, with only 35 ratifying, leading to its expiration. Yet, decades later, states like Virginia have attempted to ratify it, spurring proponents to argue these late ratifications should count.
Recent years have seen a renewed push by activists and Democratic leaders to recognize the ERA as the 28th Amendment. However, courts have consistently ruled that the original deadlines are valid, and late ratifications are ineffective. The Archivist of the United States and the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel have maintained that the ERA cannot be certified as part of the Constitution without new congressional action.
Court Ruling and Political Reactions
In July 2025, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a blow to ERA proponents by dismissing claims of its ratification as “meritless.” Despite this, Biden and some Democratic figures, such as Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, continue to push for its recognition, publicly declaring it as the 28th Amendment. This defiance comes even as judicial authorities uphold the validity of the original deadline and deny any legal basis for the ERA’s certification.
Biden’s stance is a stark contrast to the legal reality, but it aligns with a broader political narrative that seeks to enshrine gender equality into the Constitution. However, this rhetoric has been met with opposition from Republican leaders and states that have taken legal action to prevent the ERA’s certification, viewing it as a dangerous overreach with potential consequences on issues like abortion laws and military drafts for women.
Implications and Future Prospects
The court’s ruling underscores the importance of adhering to constitutional procedures, setting a precedent for the enforceability of amendment deadlines. The ERA’s path to certification is blocked by significant legal, judicial, and procedural barriers. While some may see this as a setback for gender equality, it also reaffirms the necessity of following established constitutional processes.
The ongoing debate over the ERA is a flashpoint in larger cultural and political battles, particularly around gender, abortion, and constitutional interpretation. With the ERA not part of the Constitution, there is potential for a new congressional effort to restart the amendment process, though political obstacles remain substantial. Women’s rights advocates are likely to continue lobbying for constitutional gender equality, while opponents see the court rulings as a victory for the rule of law.
Conclusion
The legal saga surrounding the Equal Rights Amendment is far from over. While proponents may continue their push, the courts and federal authorities have drawn a clear line in the sand. The debate over the ERA is emblematic of broader tensions between political aspirations and constitutional realities. As the dust settles, one thing is clear: the rule of law and adherence to constitutional procedures remain paramount in the United States.
As Biden persists in its symbolic declarations, it faces mounting skepticism from a public weary of government overreach and disregard for constitutional norms. The ERA may yet find its way back to Congress, but for now, the legal and procedural hurdles stand firm, underscoring the importance of the Constitution’s amendment process.
Copyright 2025, PatriotNews.net
