[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 65 (Thursday, May 9, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Page S3342]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Mr. Kirk, Ms. Mikulski, Ms. 
        Murkowski, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Levin, Mr. Menendez, 
        Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Heinrich, Mrs. Boxer, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Murphy, Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Landrieu, 
        Mr. Brown, Mr. Begich, and Ms. Hirono):
  S.J. Res. 15. A joint resolution removing the deadline for the 
ratification of the equal rights amendment; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as we prepare to celebrate Mother's Day 
this Sunday, I am today introducing a joint resolution which would 
remove the deadline for the ratification by the States of the equal 
rights amendment, the ERA.
  I thank my cosponsors. As of this morning my cosponsors included 
Senator Kirk, Senator Mikulski, Senator Murkowski, Senator Harkin, 
Senator Sanders, Senator Levin, Senator Menendez, Senator Stabenow, 
Senator Heinrich, Senator Boxer, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Durbin, 
Senator Lautenberg, Senator Murphy, Senator Baldwin, Senator Landrieu, 
Senator Brown, and Senator Begich.
  When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure 
had to be ratified by three-fourths of the States, or 38 States, within 
7 years. This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint 
resolution enacted by Congress, but ultimately only 35 of the 38 States 
required ratified the ERA when the deadline expired in 1982. Congress 
has the authority to give the States another chance, and should do so. 
I want to point out to my colleagues that in 1992, the 27th Amendment 
to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional pay raises was 
ratified after 203 years. So this additional delay is certainly in 
keeping with our prior precedent.
  Article 5 of the Constitution contains no time limit for the 
ratification of constitutional changes, and the ERA time limit was 
contained in a joint resolution, not the actual text of the amendment.
  The 14th Amendment of the Constitution requires equal protection of 
the laws, and so far the Supreme Court has held most sex and gender 
classifications are subject only to intermediate scrutiny when 
analyzing the laws that have a discriminatory impact. In other words, 
right now gender discrimination does not have the strict interpretation 
standard; it is not subject to the higher standard which it should be.
  In 2011, Supreme Court Justice Scalia gave an interview in which he 
stated:

       Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination 
     on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits 
     it. It doesn't.

  In other words, we don't have that protection in the Constitution 
today. Ratification of the ERA by State legislatures would provide the 
courts with a clearer guidance in holding gender or sex clarification 
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 2 years 
after ratification.
  Today nearly half the States have a version of ERA written into their 
State constitutions. The constitution of my own State of Maryland 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, and 
I thank Representative Andrews for introducing a companion version in 
the House today as well. This legislation is endorsed by a wide variety 
of groups, including United 4 Equality, the National Council of Women's 
Organizations, the American Association of University Women, Business & 
Professional Women's Foundation, Federally Employed Women, and the U.S. 
Women's Chamber of Commerce.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

                          ____________________