ERA is fraught with potential unintended consequences : While at a quick glance the ERA seems like a good thing, it is fraught with danger due to its removal of any legal distinction between men and women with its broad and rigid language. The ERA states: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” It conspicuously lacks any language that provides for reasonable exceptions. Instead, its inflexible language could potentially invalidate any law that recognizes the inherent differences between the sexes including many affirmative action programs such as the Small Business Administration programs for women owned businesses. The fear that any reasonable legal distinction would be removed is not merely a matter of speculation, but has been realized in states that have adopted an ERA for their State constitutions similar to that currently being considered for passage in Virginia in an attempt to support the rati
Posts
While at a quick glance the ERA seems like a good thing, it is fraught with danger due to its removal of any legal distinction between men and women with its broad and rigid language. The ERA states: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” It conspicuously lacks any language that provides for reasonable exceptions. Instead, its inflexible language could potentially invalidate any law that recognizes the inherent differences between the sexes including many affirmative action programs such as the Small Business Administration programs for women owned businesses. The fear that any reasonable legal distinction would be removed is not merely a matter of speculation , but has been realized in states that have adopted an ERA similar to that proposed for the U.S. Constitution. In the 18 states that passed state Equal Rights Amendments, we have not seen any benefit for women . Instead, court cases prose