[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 48 (Thursday, March 22, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2003-S2004]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. 
        Gillibrand, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. 
        Menendez, and Ms. Mikulski):
  S.J. Res. 39. A joint resolution removing the deadline for the 
ratification of the equal rights amendment, to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a joint resolution 
which would remove the deadline for the states' ratification of the 
equal rights amendment, ERA. I thank Senators Boxer, Durbin, 
Gillibrand, Harkin, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Menendez, and Mikulski for 
joining me as original cosponsors.
  When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure 
had to be ratified by \3/4\ of the States, 38 States, within 7 years. 
This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint resolution 
enacted by Congress,

[[Page S2004]]

but ultimately only 35 out of 38 States had ratified the ERA when the 
deadline expired in 1982.
  Congress can and should give the States another chance. In 1992, the 
27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional 
pay raises was ratified after 203 years. Article V of the Constitution 
contains no time limits for ratification of constitutional amendments, 
and the ERA time limit was contained in a joint resolution, not the 
actual text of the amendment.
  The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution requires ``equal 
protection of the laws,'' and the Supreme Court has so far held that 
most sex or gender classifications are subject to only ``intermediate 
scrutiny'' when analyzing laws that may have a discriminatory impact. 
In 2011 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia gave an interview in which 
he stated that ``certainly the Constitution does not require 
discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it 
prohibits it. It doesn't.'' Ratification of the ERA by state 
legislatures would provide the courts with clearer guidance in holding 
gender or sex classifications to the ``strict scrutiny'' standard.
  The ERA is a simple and straightforward constitutional amendment. It 
reads: ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or 
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.'' The 
amendment gives power to Congress to enforce its provisions by 
appropriate legislation, and the amendment would take effect two years 
after ratification by the States.
  March is Women's History Month. And today is the 40th anniversary of 
passage by the Senate of the joint resolution to extend the ERA 
ratification timeline on March 22, 1972. Today, nearly half of the 
States have a version of the ERA written into their State constitution. 
My own State of Maryland's constitution reads that ``Equality of rights 
under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.''
  I am therefore pleased to introduce this joint resolution today, 
which is endorsed by a wide variety of groups, including United 4 
Equality, the National Council of Women's Organizations, the National 
Organization for Women, and the American Association of University 
Women. I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution.

                          ____________________