Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Polybius

(18,926 posts)

15. The time limit itself was unconstitutional, then the whole Amendment might be

Reply to pnwmom (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 17, 2025, 01:04 PM

Jan 17

Also, why do you oppose states rescinding?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

SCantiGOP

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden Says Equal Rights Amendment Is 'Law of the Land' [View all] Tennessee Hillbilly Jan 17 OP

Will ERA protect the rights of Trans? no_hypocrisy Jan 17 #1

I doubt it DeepWinter Jan 17 #21

The SCROTUS will nullify this in about 3 days. nt. Voltaire2 Jan 17 #2

Nothing to nullify at this point FBaggins Jan 17 #4

And 9-0 at that Polybius Jan 17 #17

Here is the STATEMENT BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #3

Statement of President Joe Biden on the Equal Rights Amendment LetMyPeopleVote Jan 17 #5

Well Done Joe!!! MayReasonRule Jan 17 #6

Sadly, SCantiGOP Jan 17 #7

Yes. DavidDvorkin Jan 17 #8

On what basis? There's no time limit in the Constitution. pnwmom Jan 17 #9

Don't Think That's Been Litigated. GB_RN Jan 17 #11

Every amendment passed since prohibition had a deadline MichMan Jan 17 #12

The time limit itself was unconstitutional, then the whole Amendment might be Polybius Jan 17 #15

Where in the Constitution does it say a state's approval can be rescinded? nt pnwmom Jan 17 #26

Where does it say it can't? madville Jan 17 #29

The same page that it says that they can't n/t Polybius Jan 17 #33

It doesn't prohibit one either MichMan Jan 17 #28

Congress can make its own rules for its own conduct. Igel Jan 17 #31

I wouldn't say sadly, because it might be 9-0 Polybius Jan 17 #24

If it has been the 'Law of the Land' for almost five years now, why hasn't anyone filed a lawsuit citing it? Jose Garcia Jan 17 #10

Do it, Joe! One last home run! calimary Jan 17 #13

I think Biden is taunting Trump who will bear the fault if he wipes it out. CTyankee Jan 17 #19

Cite Article IV of the Consitution. Igel Jan 17 #32

Huh, I also though Roe vs Wade was also 'Law of the Land'. republianmushroom Jan 17 #14

It was "settled law," until it wasn't. (n/t) thesquanderer Jan 17 #18

That's what the lying supreme court justices, appointed by the most notorious liar in history, said UNDER OATH. BComplex Jan 17 #23

They didn't lie. They danced around the question with non-answers. thesquanderer Jan 17 #25

I understand that. But they knew what they were being asked. Playing verbal gymnastics, under oath, BComplex Jan 17 #34

I agree. But they were smart enough with their answers to avoid perjury. thesquanderer Jan 18 #35

So how come it's not on Wiki yet? Polybius Jan 17 #16

Not enough fanfare intrepidity Jan 17 #20

That's what they said about Roe... sakabatou Jan 17 #22

Post removed Post removed Jan 17 #27

It's a nice gesture madville Jan 17 #30

I heard this wouldn't be finalized because the archivist wouldn't accept it LymphocyteLover Jan 18 #36

the fate of the amendment seems very much up in the air LymphocyteLover Jan 18 #37