General Discussion

EdmondDantes_

(513 posts)

57. By that logic here are some other bothsiderisms

Fri Jan 17, 2025, 02:29 PM

Jan 2025

Eating, breathing, sleeping, drinking. Gasp, we all do those things so we must all be the same. Or perhaps bothsiderism is just being used to hand wave away something you don't like without engaging on the merits.

You still haven't even attempted to answer why if this was something he believed so strongly wasn't done immediately upon Biden taking office given the blurb only took a few minutes to write and Virginia ratified the amendment before Biden took office. Why did he do it now if he thinks this will make it the law? Why not do it the day the Dobbs decision was leaked or even fully announced? Why only do this days before he leaves office?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

5 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

ShazzieB markpkessinger Lilithschyld rictofen adnoid

135 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden says Equal Rights Amendment is ratified, kicking off expected legal battle [View all] dalton99a Jan 2025 OP

Surely now, it can no longer be a crime to treat dying women. Irish_Dem Jan 2025 #1

Any challenges with be Trump's SCOTUS and Trump's DOJ and he'll own it if the ERA is overturned. TheBlackAdder Jan 2025 #96

He will own it proudly and convince Americans he saved women. Irish_Dem Jan 2025 #114

Why did he wait 4 years? MichMan Jan 2025 #2

He doesn't want to deal with ramifications while he's presidenting. LeftInTX Jan 2025 #7

So, instead of it being defended by his own DOJ, he left it up to the Trump DOJ. n/t MichMan Jan 2025 #9

It seems that way. Seems like a Hail Mary move. LeftInTX Jan 2025 #11

I agree we should never underestimate Joe. I'm sure he thought it through. Walleye Jan 2025 #32

Agreed. InAbLuEsTaTe Jan 2025 #101

And when that happens, will you criticize Trump as much as you have Biden? W_HAMILTON Jan 2025 #31

Damn good question, damn good comments. Thanks. (nt) Paladin Jan 2025 #49

Yes...that's the EXACT reason Roy Rolling Jan 2025 #97

Some State? I would put my money on Texas - Paxton has no shame. walkingman Jan 2025 #28

Of course he will. Another state could beat him too. LeftInTX Jan 2025 #30

Never underestimate how some women Dem4life1234 Jan 2025 #135

Unfortunately I think there's a lot of things that could be said about EdmondDantes_ Jan 2025 #13

Thanks "performative" is the word. LeftInTX Jan 2025 #14

Republicans are the performative clowns 🤡. live love laugh Jan 2025 #23

I haven't seen anything that would convince me this isn't performative EdmondDantes_ Jan 2025 #26

AND .... bothsiderism rears its ugly head .... live love laugh Jan 2025 #27

By that logic here are some other bothsiderisms EdmondDantes_ Jan 2025 #57

Why didn't he save the fucking world Monday morning QB? live love laugh Jan 2025 #73

I look at it as a thorn in the side of the new administration Walleye Jan 2025 #33

Oh, yes. ShazzieB Jan 2025 #72

No, I think he's pitching a grenade. LisaM Jan 2025 #64

Ask him. live love laugh Jan 2025 #22

That's a good question, and there's no good answer msfiddlestix Jan 2025 #78

What does it matter? Blue_Tires Jan 2025 #81

So it would have already been in place the last 4 years ? MichMan Jan 2025 #82

Then Trumpers would have killed it four years ago Blue_Tires Jan 2025 #85

Because it ForgedCrank Jan 2025 #87

With that and four dollars, he'll be able to buy a cup of coffee in Wilmington next week. NT mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2025 #3

Nice... Hugin Jan 2025 #4

Statement of President Joe Biden on the Equal Rights Amendment LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2025 #5

And that SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #39

Worse than nothing, I'd bet quite a bit this goes to SCOTUS and torched Amishman Jan 2025 #65

So liberal bloggers and pundits have been demanding this Blue_Tires Jan 2025 #84

Thank you President Biden Quiet Em Jan 2025 #6

What happens if the Archivist doesn't publish it ? MichMan Jan 2025 #8

Seriously? tritsofme Jan 2025 #10

This doesn't appear to be an order to publish it DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2025 #17

He just directed her to publish it MichMan Jan 2025 #20

What would Trump do? Fire her and appoint a replacement to publish it. /nt bucolic_frolic Jan 2025 #21

This message was self-deleted by its author Ursus Arctos Jan 2025 #41

The National Archives is an independent agency DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2025 #25

That's good to know Polybius Jan 2025 #50

Who the hell put a time limit on passing this anyway? I just don't know. Walleye Jan 2025 #34

Congress did DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2025 #36

Congress, when it was passed 50 years ago MichMan Jan 2025 #37

I think the Founding Fathers should have set every proposed Amendment to 10-15 years Polybius Jan 2025 #53

Nothing happens. Biden just expressed a personal opinion Kaleva Jan 2025 #111

She already won a court case affirming her position Shrek Jan 2025 #133

This will be interesting, it's not immediately clear this is anything other than Biden's opinion. tritsofme Jan 2025 #12

It's not an EO? LeftInTX Jan 2025 #15

Its not an EO DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2025 #16

Another one. Sheesh. It's an Amendment. AllyCat Jan 2025 #86

Thank you, President Biden. pandr32 Jan 2025 #18

I don't see how it kicks off a legal battle FBaggins Jan 2025 #19

Apparently the deadline for approval by the states was 1982(!), so this is all for show. TheRickles Jan 2025 #24

I'm just wondering how this deadline got set? I'll check out the link. Walleye Jan 2025 #35

Here's more info, from today's Boston Globe (behind a paywall) TheRickles Jan 2025 #42

Not to mention the states that rescinded their ratifications SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #43

It's an interesting debate Polybius Jan 2025 #56

An interesting debate to be sure SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #60

It might even be 9-0 or close to it Polybius Jan 2025 #63

I imagine because it's not feasible to go find someone's ballot once it is submitted MichMan Jan 2025 #66

Early voting is a whole new topic Polybius Jan 2025 #67

Rescinding is not legal. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #89

We really don't know SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #91

It certainly seems to me a deadline for ratification is reasonable. What if the 18th Amendment - prohibiting Midwestern Democrat Jan 2025 #104

The 27th amendment became part of the Constitution 202 years after it was first proposed. Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #105

IMO, that's a flaw in the Constitution Polybius Jan 2025 #109

I agree with SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #115

So if the Democrats win Congress in the midterms, could they retroactively change the deadline I wonder Walleye Jan 2025 #55

Perhaps SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #68

You can change a deadline before it happens, but how do you change it after the date? Polybius Jan 2025 #69

It's from the Associated Press, so maybe it's posted elsewhere without the Globe's paywall. TheRickles Jan 2025 #44

There is nothing in the Constitution saying there can be a deadline for ratification Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #48

If the deadline is unconstitutional, then the entire Amendment might be invalid Polybius Jan 2025 #76

Some Very smart legal scholars disagree and think it should stand. Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #79

I respect you tremendously, but we disagree on this Polybius Jan 2025 #88

There are strong legal arguments on the first two points. Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #90

Serious question SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #95

No. But it is a valid opinion by the ABA. And this Supreme Court has already shown that they are more than willing Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #98

Thanks for your response n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #100

Thanks for the detailed reply, and here's mine Polybius Jan 2025 #108

Wrong. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #94

I'm still curious SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #99

The "deadline" was always bullshit. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #103

Your last line, 1000%. (We shouldn't need an ERA. FULL STOP.) RandomNumbers Jan 2025 #128

Thank you, Joe SheltieLover Jan 2025 #29

The "Christian" Taliban will never let that stand. nt CousinIT Jan 2025 #38

It's About Damn Time!!! Do it, Joe! calimary Jan 2025 #40

I am so confused. This is the effing 11th Hour of Biden's administration, not TGIF... Hekate Jan 2025 #45

It's a short amendment. Link below. mn9driver Jan 2025 #46

Biden is a great guy, so he's allowed to be wrong sometimes Polybius Jan 2025 #47

VP Harris also concurs that it is now the law of the land MichMan Jan 2025 #54

Then she's wrong too, because at this moment, it isn't Polybius Jan 2025 #59

Thanks, President Biden! 🫶 still-prayin4rain Jan 2025 #51

It is about time. I hope it survives in court. Martin68 Jan 2025 #52

It wont Kaleva Jan 2025 #112

My understanding is that there is a gray area involved in the ratification process. The required of states required Martin68 Jan 2025 #122

And the courts will rule SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #123

Biden's action won't force anything Shrek Jan 2025 #130

It's worth a shot HereForTheParty Jan 2025 #58

Thank you, again, President Joe Biden! You are the best president of my lifetime. LaMouffette Jan 2025 #61

I believe this is what I am MOST excited to hear about! AllyCat Jan 2025 #62

What are the legal arguments that could be brought against it? LAS14 Jan 2025 #70

Two legal arguments SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #71

Huh. Maybe I should have asked what the legal arguments are FOR ratification... nt LAS14 Jan 2025 #74

None n/t Polybius Jan 2025 #75

The main argument for implementation is that the arguments against are invalid Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #107

Baloney. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #92

We don't now that rescinding is illegal SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #93

It was a big story when the 38th state ratified (Virginia in 2020) Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #106

thre was a 7 year deadline for ratification - ending in the early 1980s rampartd Jan 2025 #77

So Biden is just dumping a legal fuss into Trump's lap to show his misogyny. nt LAS14 Jan 2025 #80

I can't wait to hear the challenges. William769 Jan 2025 #83

Might not be any challenges as a president has no part in ratification Kaleva Jan 2025 #113

I mean the challenges to the ERA becoming law. William769 Jan 2025 #116

It won't be SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #117

Thanks for a good explanation. William769 Jan 2025 #118

this seems huge prodigitalson Jan 2025 #102

A president doesn't have a role in the process of ratification Kaleva Jan 2025 #110

This is going to get very interesting. niyad Jan 2025 #119

I agree SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #120

Popcorn??? niyad Jan 2025 #121

The reporters and some lawyers still continue with myths about ERA and ratification. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #124

That doesn't sound like an accurate description of NOW v Idaho. The case was dismissed as moot tritsofme Jan 2025 #125

Exactly SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #126

Meaningless. Time limit has expired. Callie1979 Jan 2025 #127

Prepare SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #129

So your opinion is invalid if you die?? Thats a new one! Callie1979 Jan 2025 #132

As a lifelong Democrat, I'm frankly appalled by a lot of the current liberal thought that's emerged in the blogosphere Midwestern Democrat Jan 2025 #134

For any who missed it, here's a complete & comprehensible explanation... Hekate Jan 2025 #131