Biden says Equal Rights Amendment is ratified, kicking off expected legal battle

[Polybius]

108. Thanks for the detailed reply, and here's mine

1) In addressing the initial aspect, it may appear illogical to you; however, from a legal standpoint, it is not. If an agreement is established between two parties and the language is altered, the contract may be rendered invalid. They could convincingly assert that their actions were motivated by the necessity of completing it prior to 1982, as their state shifted politically thereafter and would not endorse such an agreement in the current era (it is highly unlikely that several of those states would do so). This could potentially be the strongest of the three arguments against it.

2) Regarding whether a state has the authority to rescind, you reference precedents related to the 14th and 15th Amendments; however, I am not aware of any Supreme Court decision that has addressed this issue. Additionally, it is quite perplexing that you place such emphasis on precedent concerning rescindment while overlooking the precedents established in "Dillon v. Gloss" and "Coleman v. Miller," both of which affirm that deadlines are constitutional.

3) The American Bar Association may articulate their views on this matter as extensively as they wish; however, their stance is incorrect, and they possess no authority regarding this issue.

4) What do you believe the perception of the American public would be if they observed that a measure was enacted with a deadline, only to be disregarded afterward? I do not wish to achieve victory in such a manner. More significantly, RGB indicated that a fresh start is necessary due to the deadline. That is satisfactory to me. The ruling will be unanimous at 9-0, as it ought to be.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg says deadline to ratify Equal Rights Amendment has expired: ‘I’d like it to start over’