A resolution recognizing the expiration of the Equal Rights Amendment proposed by Congress in March 1972, and observing that Congress has no authority to modify a resolution proposing a constitutional amendment after the amendment has been submitted to the States or after the amendment has expired.
The resolution outlines the historical context of the ERA and the judicial interpretations surrounding the amendment's ratification deadline. It asserts that only 35 out of the necessary 38 states ratified the ERA before its seven-year deadline, and furthermore, some states rescinded their ratification, which raises questions regarding the validity of continued attempts to revive the amendment under its expired status. The resolution cites various court rulings affirming the legitimacy of the deadline and Congress's limited role once a proposal has been made to the states.
SR107 is a resolution that acknowledges the expiration of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which was proposed by Congress in March 1972. The bill explicitly states that Congress has no authority to alter the resolution proposing a constitutional amendment once it has been submitted to the states, or after its expiration. The resolution reinforces the constitutional process outlined in Article V, which assigns the power of proposing amendments to Congress and requires ratification by three-fourths of the states for an amendment to be adopted.
Debate surrounding SR107 centers on the broader implications for women's rights and constitutionality. Proponents of the resolution argue that recognizing the expiration of the ERA is necessary to uphold the integrity of the constitutional amendment process. In contrast, supporters of the ERA view the resolution as an effort to undermine women's rights by denying the necessity of the amendment. The resolution opens conversations about evolving interpretations of rights and gender equality in constitutional law.