General Discussion

valleyrogue

(2,122 posts)

48. I think Laurence Tribe answered the question about the time limit and why Congress didn't do anything.

Sat Jan 18, 2025, 02:08 PM

Jan 2025

National Organization For Women v. Idaho was decided in 1982, the year the second ERA "time limit" expired. That is why Congress didn't "extend" it further. The USSC settled the matter. The media and political right are engaging in brazen dishonesty about the ERA.

There is the answer, folks. There is NO "time limit" to ratify per the USSC decision. Laurence Tribe and the American Bar Association KNOW what they are talking about.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

Quiet Em SheltieLover

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Laurence Tribe - The Equal Rights Amendment at Long Last [View all] Quiet Em Jan 2025 OP

Oh, I was waiting to hear from Laurence Tribe. Thank you! Of course the GD MAGATS will take it to court but... hlthe2b Jan 2025 #1

Yes, decades past due. Quiet Em Jan 2025 #2

They won't take it to court FBaggins Jan 2025 #10

You obviously did NOT read Tribe's full assessment. hlthe2b Jan 2025 #11

I read enough to know that it wasn't going anywhere FBaggins Jan 2025 #14

When you can demonstrate you have a resume even 10% as strong as Laurence Tribe's as a constitutional expert Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #20

You do know that "appeal to authority" is a logical fallacy, right? FBaggins Jan 2025 #27

Post removed Post removed Jan 2025 #31

RBG didn't comment on Biden's opinion (not action) from the grave FBaggins Jan 2025 #32

SMH Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #33

Thx for giving us Lawrence Tribe. At long last this morning, a post about ERA that makes sense Hekate Jan 2025 #3

You are very welcome. Quiet Em Jan 2025 #6

Prof. Tribe KNOWS this issue in and out. He was there in the trenches during the 1970s valleyrogue Jan 2025 #37

My mother, God rest her soul, is smiling down on this! Sogo Jan 2025 #4

Mine too. Wicked Blue Jan 2025 #16

Excellent. Historic and excellent! BoRaGard Jan 2025 #5

I'm sure insecure magats will be rushing to the scotus, screaming and crying, hair on fire SheltieLover Jan 2025 #7

USSC can't undo a constitutional amendment. There is no provision for it. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #38

It's not SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #43

I doubt it will be Republicans that take this to court SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #8

Already LGBTQ activists on TicTok and IG DeepWinter Jan 2025 #9

Wow. That's just silly rollin74 Jan 2025 #12

That misinformation is meant to be divisive of the Left ... Think. Again. Jan 2025 #59

Can't remember the last time Tribe got one right FBaggins Jan 2025 #13

He has been on the winning side multiple times, but he has also been on the losing side as well MichMan Jan 2025 #19

Completely different situations Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #21

The ruling in the Colorado case was 9-0. MichMan Jan 2025 #22

Not quite what you're making it out to be. Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #29

Which is my very point FBaggins Jan 2025 #24

He didn't lose period. He didn't argue before the court. Wiz Imp Jan 2025 #30

Trust me, Repugs will fight to remove all of women's rights... those we have left that is NotHardly Jan 2025 #15

Long past time, indeed mcar Jan 2025 #17

Removing is just as hard as passing. paleotn Jan 2025 #18

At this point madville Jan 2025 #34

Wrong. There was NO "official" deadline by Congress. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #40

He's certainly entitled to his opinion madville Jan 2025 #44

It will NEVER happen. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #39

In Tribe's point of view, can a state start by opposing ratification, which would then prevent it always? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2025 #23

As of January 2020, 38 States, 3/4 fourths, have ratified the ERA Quiet Em Jan 2025 #25

That doesn't answer my question, though. muriel_volestrangler Jan 2025 #26

Yes. It can't be undone. There is NO provision in the Constitution for it. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #42

No, I mean can a state's vote to NOT ratify be undone by a later vote to ratify? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2025 #45

Of course they can change it there. They didn't ratify in the first place. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #60

So you support a mechanism to pass amendments that even a majority never support at a given time? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2025 #64

It is not constitutional to "rescind" a ratification. Only 3/4 of Congress and legislatures can repeal an amendment. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #41

Which states SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #65

Assuming the current S. Ct. accepted Tribe's line of reasoning snot Jan 2025 #28

The USSC can't overturn a constitutional amendment. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #56

You keep spreading false information about NOW v Idaho, why? tritsofme Jan 2025 #57

Tribe knows what he is talking about. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #35

Prof. Tribe is one of, if not THE, leading constitutional experts in the United States. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #36

The important thing to note about the "time limit." valleyrogue Jan 2025 #46

So that settles it! Polybius Jan 2025 #47

It's not just Laurence Tribe. Quiet Em Jan 2025 #49

I think it will be 9-0 Polybius Jan 2025 #50

There is no way anyone would be open to allowing States to rescind an amendment. Quiet Em Jan 2025 #51

It actually wouldn't cause any issues SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #52

As long as it's before the Amendment is ratified, what's the big deal? Polybius Jan 2025 #55

Yep SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #53

I think Laurence Tribe answered the question about the time limit and why Congress didn't do anything. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #48

You should probably read that case SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2025 #54

Statement of President Joe Biden on the Equal Rights Amendment LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2025 #58

The "readers added context" part is a complete and total LIE. valleyrogue Jan 2025 #61

I'm afraid it is you who is spreading misinformation right now. tritsofme Jan 2025 #63

Thinking this through further... snot Jan 2025 #62