If this doesn't sum up the absolute, blatant hypocrisy of the Democrats well, we don't know what will.
Back in 1972, Congress sent the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the states for ratification in 1972. At the time, the states had a seven-year deadline to ratify the amendment. That deadline was extended to 1982 and yet, the ERA was not ratified.
You'd think the people who scream about norms, democracy, and the rule of law would let the matter rest, no? Because MUH NORMS and MUH DEMOCRACY and all that.
But no.
In 2020, Virginia finally decided to ratify the amendment -- 42 years after the deadline. Democrats saw that as all they needed to publish the ERA and add it to the Constitution.
Because Democracy. Norms. Or something.
Now that Biden is on his way out of the office, the people who want us to know Donald Trump is a fascist are pushing Biden to publish the ERA.
Thankfully -- for now -- the archivist and deputy archivist are point out what Democrats should know: doing so is illegal. And they refuse to comply.
As pressure rises on Biden to direct the archivist to publish the ERA, the archivist says she won’t do it. pic.twitter.com/Buvp3aSObE
— Annie Karni (@anniekarni) December 17, 2024
“In 2020 and again in 2022, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice affirmed that the ratification deadline established by Congress for the ERA is valid and enforceable," they said in a joint statement. “The OLC concluded that extending or removing the deadline requires new action by Congress or the courts. Court decisions at both the District and Circuit levels have affirmed that the ratification deadlines established by Congress for the ERA are valid.”
They added: “Therefore, the Archivist of the United States cannot legally publish the Equal Rights Amendment. As the leaders of the National Archives, we will abide by these legal precedents and support the constitutional framework in which we operate.”
Congress tried last year in the latest push to lift the deadline to allow for the amendment's ratification, but the measure didn't reach the required 60-vote threshold in the Senate.
White House spokesperson Kelly Scully said “President Biden has been clear that he wants to see the Equal Rights Amendment definitively enshrined in the Constitution."
Recommended
Nope. That ship sailed before this writer was even born.
They don't get a mulligan on this.
The chance to ratify the ERA expired in 1982.
The process starts over.
The current Archivist, Colleen Shogan, is the first-ever woman to be nominated as Archivist.
— Kate Kelly (@Kate_Kelly_Esq) December 17, 2024
You know what those who oppose gender equality love to do most???
Hide their misogyny behind a woman’s skirts.
Oh, sweetie.
This has nothing to do with misogyny and everything to do with the rule of law.
Does the "norms" crowd have any comment on Biden trying to executive order a new amendment into existence?
— Small Gov Lizard (@smallgovlizard) December 17, 2024
You hear that sound?
Yeah, that's crickets chirping.
Brava! Finally, someone who adheres to the rule of law.
— Oh *that* Beth (@luckschanged) December 17, 2024
No one is above the law.
What freaking part of "it's illegal for her to do so" are idiots too stupid to understand? pic.twitter.com/WuVYtOkMpN
— That One Guy Who's Always Right (@RLLazzarini) December 17, 2024
It's (D)ifferent when they want to break the law.
You make it sound like it's her choice. It's not. She's bound by the constitution and laws.
— Super Human Epoch (@SuperHumanEpoch) December 17, 2024
And she takes that duty seriously.
Shouldn't the congressional correspondent for the NYT be able to weigh in on whether the archivist is correct or not?
— Ring of Sour (@ringofsour) December 17, 2024
Spoiler: She's correct.
She is correct.
BREAKING: Constitution Exists https://t.co/w9Lv5ty8S0
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) December 17, 2024
And it means something.
That’s because it’s illegal. Hope this is useful. https://t.co/P6wmtijwyj
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) December 17, 2024
Glad we could clear this up.
Justice Ginsburg was right: The only way to put an ERA into the Constitution is to "start over." https://t.co/DDoyWXCdbC
— Ramesh Ponnuru (@RameshPonnuru) December 17, 2024
Remember when the Left idolized RBG?
They should probably listen to her.
Correct. Well-established legal precedent is that they can’t under these circumstances. They’re abiding by the law. https://t.co/uppE2HEXza
— Sunny (@sunnyright) December 17, 2024
We understand why pardon-happy Biden and the rest of the Democrats are confused by someone who abides by the law.
Love how the left is apparently trying to revive the 70’s era Equal Rights Amendment all of a sudden so they can claim some kind of vague victory for Biden’s 4 year term of bungling and ineffectiveness, it’d be very on brand for that “victory” to be an unconstitutional overreach https://t.co/bG5nEwngGV
— Enguerrand VII de Coucy (@ingelramdecoucy) December 17, 2024
Totally on-brand for the Left.
And yet we constantly hear about the Trumpian threat to our sacred norms.
— Mike Coté 🎄🎅🎄🎅 (@ratlpolicy) December 17, 2024
Nobody buys that s**t when the other side pushes for blatantly illegal & unconstitutional nonsense all the time.
Pack the court? Why not? Pretend a law was passed that wasn't? Sure! Pardon your son? Yup! https://t.co/gc9FHCpxnx
THIS.
Is Biden including a personalized pardon to get her off the hook for breaking the law? Apparently what they want her to do would break the law, and there's a new Sheriff in town next month. https://t.co/PEQ4V1Th4I
— Root (@1960Root) December 17, 2024
An excellent question.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member