Foundation for Moral Law

Foundation for Moral Law

Latest News and Updates

blog image

Foundation Cheers Victory Over the Radical "Equal Rights Amendment"

March 01, 20232 min read

“What part of 'No!' do the radical ERA proponents not understand?” - Foundation Senior Counsel Colonel John Eidsmoe

The Foundation for Moral Law applauds the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s decision last week in State of Illinois v. David Ferriero, affirming the lower court’s dismissal of an effort to secure ratification for the so-called Equal Rights Amendment (“ERA”).

In 1972, Congress sent the ERA to the States for ratification and included a seven year deadline to ratify. However, by the end of that period, three states were still needed, and four had chosen to rescind their ratifications. In short, the ERA was never ratified by the States and has long been considered dead.

However, that did not stop the radical progressives from trying to railroad it through, even 40+ years later. In this case, the States of Illinois and Nevada purported to ratify and went to court to argue that the Archivist of the United States must certify that the ERA was now the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit has ruled that this is not the appropriate process and affirmed the lower court's dismissal.

Foundation Lead Staff Attorney Talmadge Butts said, “As argued in our amicus brief, under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I Section 8, Congress has the power to set limits on ratification. Congress did so with the ERA, and even the late Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, an icon of the Left, agreed that the proper process must be followed. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit has reached the same conclusion.”

Read the amicus brief here.

Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe, asked, “What part of 'No!' do the radical ERA proponents not understand? The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was sent to the States in 1972 with a seven-year deadline for ratification. When appeared destined for defeat, they illegally sought a five-year extension. Even with that extension, they couldn't get the necessary States for ratification, as the public was increasingly awakened to the radical implications of ERA. Now, four decades later, they argue that ratification deadlines are unconstitutional, even though the Supreme Court has clearly said otherwise. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has firmly rejected this nonsense. Common-sense constitutionalism has prevailed.”

equal rights amendmentconstitutionratification
blog author image

Foundation for Moral Law Staff

Back to Blog
blog image

Foundation Cheers Victory Over the Radical "Equal Rights Amendment"

March 01, 20232 min read

“What part of 'No!' do the radical ERA proponents not understand?” - Foundation Senior Counsel Colonel John Eidsmoe

The Foundation for Moral Law applauds the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s decision last week in State of Illinois v. David Ferriero, affirming the lower court’s dismissal of an effort to secure ratification for the so-called Equal Rights Amendment (“ERA”).

In 1972, Congress sent the ERA to the States for ratification and included a seven year deadline to ratify. However, by the end of that period, three states were still needed, and four had chosen to rescind their ratifications. In short, the ERA was never ratified by the States and has long been considered dead.

However, that did not stop the radical progressives from trying to railroad it through, even 40+ years later. In this case, the States of Illinois and Nevada purported to ratify and went to court to argue that the Archivist of the United States must certify that the ERA was now the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit has ruled that this is not the appropriate process and affirmed the lower court's dismissal.

Foundation Lead Staff Attorney Talmadge Butts said, “As argued in our amicus brief, under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I Section 8, Congress has the power to set limits on ratification. Congress did so with the ERA, and even the late Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, an icon of the Left, agreed that the proper process must be followed. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit has reached the same conclusion.”

Read the amicus brief here.

Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe, asked, “What part of 'No!' do the radical ERA proponents not understand? The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was sent to the States in 1972 with a seven-year deadline for ratification. When appeared destined for defeat, they illegally sought a five-year extension. Even with that extension, they couldn't get the necessary States for ratification, as the public was increasingly awakened to the radical implications of ERA. Now, four decades later, they argue that ratification deadlines are unconstitutional, even though the Supreme Court has clearly said otherwise. Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has firmly rejected this nonsense. Common-sense constitutionalism has prevailed.”

equal rights amendmentconstitutionratification
blog author image

Foundation for Moral Law Staff

Back to Blog

Join our emailing list to stay up-to-date on the cases we are working and those we are watching

We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

We depend on your support to fight for freedom.

Join the cause!

Join our emailing list to stay up-to-date on the cases we are working and those we are watching

We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

We depend on your support to fight for freedom.

All donations are tax deductible.

P.O. Box 4086

Montgomery, AL 36103

P.O. Box 4086

Montgomery, AL 36103