The ongoing debate over the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) saw the National Archives assert it is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
According to the Daily Caller, despite President Joe Biden's bold assertion on Thursday that the ERA is the "law of the land," the National Archives confirmed otherwise on Friday.
The announcement from the Archives comes as a reaffirmation of a longstanding legal perspective supported by judicial precedents and past legal opinions. This statement starkly contrasts with President Biden’s recent declaration.
The legal issues surrounding the ERA are intricate and have been evaluated repeatedly over the years. Dr. Colleen Shogan and Deputy Archivist William J. Bosanko pointed out in December that the ERA faces significant legal and procedural barriers that prevent its certification as part of the Constitution.
They underscored that the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice upheld the validity of the ERA's ratification deadline in 2020 and reaffirmed its enforceability in 2022.
This aligns with legal precedents stipulating that extending or removing this deadline involves an act of Congress or a new court ruling.
Dr. Colleen Shogan and Deputy Archivist William J. Bosanko elaborated on the legal standpoint regarding the ERA, stating:
"The OLC concluded that extending or removing the deadline requires new action by Congress or the courts. Court decisions at both the District and Circuit levels have affirmed that the ratification deadlines established by Congress for the ERA are valid. Therefore, the Archivist of the United States cannot legally publish the Equal Rights Amendment. As the leaders of the National Archives, we will abide by these legal precedents and support the constitutional framework in which we operate."
The stance of the National Archives is echoed by their spokesperson, who emphasized, “This is a long-standing position for the Archivist and the National Archives.” This reaffirmation echoes the broader consensus within certain legal and governmental frameworks.
Known for his long-standing support of the ERA, President Joe Biden has vocalized his advocacy for over five decades. He believes in preventing discrimination based on sex, stating, “I have supported the Equal Rights Amendment for more than 50 years and have long been clear that no one should be discriminated against based on their sex.”
Despite his passionate support, the legal barriers as stated by the National Archives and the Department of Justice starkly contrast the President's recent declarations and suggest a significant hurdle in altering the ERA's current status.
The legal precedents surrounding the ERA illustrate a complex judicial and legislative landscape. These hurdles underscore the intricate procedures involved in amending the U.S. Constitution—a rigorous process that requires broad legislative consensus and judicial endorsement.
The dialogue between President Biden’s administration and the legal interpretations held by the National Archives underscores a pivotal discussion about constitutional amendments and their implications for U.S. law.
In conclusion, the recent declaration by the National Archives maintains that the ERA does not currently hold constitutional validity, despite assertions by President Joe Biden. The conflict highlights ongoing debates about constitutional amendments and the formidable legal criteria required for such changes.
