Equal Rights Amendment North Carolina Alliance

It's Time to Write Women Into the Constitution!

Blog

NC Ratification Petition

by 2 Comments

Going to church, an organization meeting or a big event? Download and circulate our petition to the legislators of North Carolina! The more signatures legislators see from their own constituents, the better!

Petitions can be sent to the NC Speaker of the House, NC Senate President Pro-tempore, and any legislator that represents one of your members.

Please also send a copy of the petitions to Teri Walley, Vice-President, Communications of the ERA-NC Alliance

Here’s where you’ll find contact information for the NCGA leadership: [Read more…] about NC Ratification Petition

Let’s Make History! ERA 2019

by Leave a Comment


North Carolina has a historic chance to be the 38th — and final! — state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Join us as we bring that message to our legislators. We need them to know that North Carolina wants equal rights for all – women and men!

One more state. Not one more genERAtion.
#ALLforERA

Event: Let’s Make History: ERA 2019
Date: Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2019
Time: 9:30 am – 12:30 pm
Location: North Carolina General Assembly, 16 W. Jones Street, Raleigh, NC

Join our Facebook event and let us know you are coming!
Click here: Let’s Make History: ERA 2019 

Details:
9:30 am – Gather on the 1st floor, in the 1300 quadrant to the left as you enter the building, Jones Street entrance. You’ll receive instructions.

10:00 am – 12:30 pm – We’ll distribute 170 copies of ERA advocacy cards and DVDs to legislators (120 House, 50 Senate).

Colors: Alliance T-shirts or other green and white apparel or lapel ribbons if you are able, but not required.

Security: You must pass through a security check at entrances.

Information about directions, parking and dining at the legislature can be found here: General Information

Please share this invitation widely with your friends, family and acquaintances!

County Contact Campaign

by 2 Comments

ERA-NC C3 Map May 20We’re recruiting for our County Contact Campaign!

We know the ERA ratification bills will be re-introduced in the NC General Assembly in 2020, and we want to be sure there’s at least one person in each of North Carolina’s 100 counties to be part of our rapid response team to help us get the word out about it! As a member of the campaign, you’ll contact your county representatives first, to encourage and remind them to sign on to the bills as co-sponsors, and then spread the word to other ERA activists in your county.

To get the ball rolling in your county, please fill out this form:

County Contact Campaign

FAQ about the ERA

by 1 Comment

The Equal Rights Amendment: Common Legal Questions

Prepared for the ERA-NC Alliance by Winston & Strawn, LLP

Frequently Asked Questions about the ERA1. What does the ERA do, and why is it important?

The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee equal rights for women. According to the late Justice Scalia, “Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t.”

The ERA would change that. It would guarantee that “[e]quality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.” It would apply, for example, if the government passes a discriminatory law, or takes female assault victims less seriously than male victims, or imposes a tax
that disadvantages women in particular, or denies female soldiers an equal chance to defend their country and move up in the ranks. The ERA would stand in the way of these and other discriminatory “state actions.”

2. Why is the ERA necessary, in light of the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause?

The Fourteenth Amendment says that no state may “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The Fifth Amendment applies the same principle to the federal government. But these protections do not apply to sex in the same way they apply to race or national origin.

Today, when a court considers a challenge to a law that discriminates based on sex, it will uphold the law as long as it bears a “substantial relationship” to an “important government purpose.” This is called intermediate scrutiny. The ERA would require strict scrutiny-the same test that applies to discrimination based on race
and national origin. Under that test, the law must be “narrowly tailored” to achieve a “compelling government interest,” and it must be the “least restrictive means” of doing so. This means that the court would strike down the law if the goal behind it is not appropriate and compelling, or if there is a different way to accomplish it.

3. How would the ERA differ from the protections already provided under the law?

There are a variety of local, state, and federal laws that prohibit discrimination. For example, Title VII is a federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating based on sex, race, color, national origin, or religion. It protects employees who work for corporations over a certain size, as well as federal and state employees. Title IX is a federal law that (with certain exceptions) requires any school that receives federal funds to give students equal opportunities regardless of sex. The ERA addresses discrimination from a different perspective: it would prohibit discrimination by the government, including in statutes, regulations, employment, and law enforcement.

4. What about the deadline for ratification that expired in 1982?

The ERA was ratified by 35 states before the deadline imposed by Congress. Last spring, Nevada became the 36th. In May of 2018 Illinois became the 37th. One more ratification is needed to reach the threshold set by the Constitution.

Congress created the deadline, so it must have the power to remove it-or to extend it (as it did in 1979). The Supreme Court has held that it is up to Congress-not the courts-to decide how to deal with the timing of ratification. [Coleman v. Miller (1939).] A decision to remove the deadline should be analyzed the same way.

5. Didn’t some states “undo” their ratifications? What is the impact of that?

It is true that five of the states that ratified the ERA later passed resolutions attempting to limit or rescind their prior ratifications. But historically, resolutions like these have not prevented the prior ratifications from counting toward the threshold. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, Congress declared it to be effective even though two states had passed resolutions attempting to rescind. The Supreme Court has said that it will not second-guess this kind of determination. [Coleman v. Miller (1939).]

Although one court held in 1981 that a state did have the power to rescind its ratification of the ERA, the Supreme Court vacated that decision after the ERA deadline had passed and the appeal to the Supreme Court had become moot. As of today, then, there is no case law holding that a ratification can be “undone.”

6. So, if 38 states ratify the ERA, what happens next?

Congress can then take action to remove, extend, or waive the earlier deadline. (There is already a proposed bill that would do this.) It could also express a view about the attempts to rescind the ratifications in five states.

7. Opponents of the ERA have said that it would prohibit any distinctions based on sex and would overturn laws that benefit women. Is that true?

No. The government would still be able to draw a distinction based on sex if it passes “strict scrutiny.” But most of the laws that people think of as benefitting women-like social security regulations, estate laws, laws requiring child and spousal support, and so on-are actually already sex-neutral. And for those that are not, legislators would have two years after the ERA is enacted to add broader language-like “spouse” rather than “wife.”

8. Opponents of the ERA say that if it passes, states will lose their power to legislate about family law, sex crime laws, and other laws impacted by gender. Is that true?

No. The ERA will not take any power away from states-except the power to make unnecessary distinctions based on sex.

9. Isn’t this all about changing the law on abortion?

No. The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution already protects the right to abortion. [Roe v. Wade (S.Ct. 1973).] And in North Carolina, ratifying a federal ERA will not change state law at all, so it will not lead to any change in state laws relating to abortion.

10. One anti-ERA organization has said that passing the ERA would require removing gender designations from bathrooms, locker rooms, jails, and hospital rooms. Is that true?

No. There is no reason to think that passing the ERA would have these kinds of effects. Other states, such as Illinois, have had equal rights guarantees in place for decades, and it has not eliminated separate women’s and men’s restrooms.

11. Isn’t it true that adopting the ERA won’t erase the gender wage gap?

Yes. The ERA alone would not erase the wage gap, because it would apply to “the United States and any State,” not to private employers directly. It might stop the government from rolling back anti-discrimination laws, but it will not automatically make them stronger. So in the fight for equality, there will be plenty left to do.

Updated 6/21/18
www.winston.com
© 2018 Winston & Strawn LLP

2018 Candidates Surveys

by 2 Comments

The ERA-NC Alliance reached out to EVERY North Carolina candidate running for Congress and the General Assembly this year! We called as many candidates individually as we could, and sent out postcards as well.

A ‘yes’ means the candidate will co-sponsor and vote for the resolution to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. Many candidates also returned comments with their survey; you can read their comments in this document.

Candidate Survey Results
NC HOUSE Name Supports ERA?
1 Edward Goodwin Yes
1 Ronald Wesson Yes
2 Darryl Moss Yes
3 T. Lee Horne No
3 Barbara Lee Yes
3 Michael Speciale No
4 DaQuen Love Yes
5 Howard Hunter III Yes
6 Tess Judge Yes
7 Bobbie Richardson Yes
8 Kandie Smith Yes
10 Tracy Blackmon Yes
11 Allison Dahle Yes
11 Travis Groo Yes
12 George Graham Yes
13 Penelope diMaio Yes
14 Isaiah Johnson Yes
16 John Johnson Yes
17 Tom Simmons Yes
19 Marcia Morgan Yes
20 Leslie Cohen Yes
26 Linda Bennett Yes
29 MaryAnn Black Yes
30 Marcia Morey Yes
31 Zack Hawkins Yes
32 Terry Garrison Yes
33 Rosa Gill Yes
33 Anne Murtha Yes
35 Michael Nelson Yes
36 Julie von Haefen Yes
37 Sydney Batch Yes
39 Darren Jackson Yes
40 Joe John Yes
41 Gale Adcock Yes
42 Marvin Lucas Yes
43 John Czajkowski Yes
44 Linda Devore Yes
44 Billy Richardson Yes
45 Albeiro Florez Yes
48 Russell Walker No
49 Cynthia Ball Yes
50 Graig Meyer Yes
52 Lowell Simon Yes
53 Richard Chapman Yes
56 Verla Insko Yes
57 Ashton Clemmons Yes
60 Cecil Brockman Yes
61 Pricey Harrison Yes
62 Martha Shafer Yes
63 Erica McAdoo Yes
66 Justin Miller Yes
68 Richard Foulke Yes
71 Evelyn Terry Yes
74 Terri LeGrand Yes
75 Dan Besse Yes
76 Joe Fowler Yes
76 Harry Warren Yes
77 Bonnie Dawn Clark Yes
78 James Meredith, Jr. Yes
79 Jerry Langley Yes
80 Wendy Sellars Yes
81 Lewie Phillips Yes
82 Aimy Steele Yes
84 Allen Edwards Yes
85 Howard Larsen Yes
86 Tim Barnsback Yes
87 Amanda Bregel Yes
88 Mary Belk Yes
89 Greg Cranford Yes
95 Carla Fassbender Yes
96 Kim Bost Yes
97 Natalie Robertson Yes
98 Christy Clark Yes
99 Nasif Majeed Yes
100 John Autry Yes
101 Carolyn Logan Yes
102 Becky Carney Yes
103 Rachel Hunt Yes
106 Carla Cunningham Yes
109 Susan Maxon Yes
113 Sam Edney Yes
114 Susan Fisher Yes
115 John Ager Yes
116 Brian Turner Yes
117 Gayle Kemp Yes
117 Chuck McGrady Yes
118 Rhonda Cole Schanderel Yes
119 Joe Sam Queen Yes
     
NC SENATE Name  
1 D. Cole Phelps Yes
2 Ginger Garner Yes
2 Tim Harris No
3 Charles Earley Yes
3 Erica Smith-Ingram Yes
4 Jesse Shearin Yes
6 Joseph Webb Yes
7 Barbara Dantonio Yes
8 Dr. David Sink, Jr. Yes
9 Harper Peterson Yes
10 Vernon Ray Moore Yes
11 Albert Pacer Yes
14 Daniel Blue Yes
15 Jay Chaudhuri Yes
16 Wiley Nickel Yes
17 Sam Searcy Yes
19 Kirk Deviere Yes
20 Floyd McKissick, Jr. Yes
22 Mike Woodard Yes
23 Valerie Foushee Yes
24 JD Wooten Yes
25 Helen Probst Mills Yes
28 Gladys Robinson Yes
30 Jen Mangrum Yes
31 John Motsinger, Jr. Yes
40 Joyce Waddell Yes
41 Natasha Marcus Yes
42 Ric Vandett Yes
43 Altriese Price Yes
44 David Lattimore Yes
46 Art Sherwood Yes
47 David Wheeler Yes
48 Norm Bossert Yes
49 Mark Crawford Yes
49 Terry Van Duyn Yes
     
US HOUSE Name  
2 Jeff Matemu Yes
5 DD Adams Yes
6 Ryan Watts Yes
8 Frank McNeill Yes
10 David Brown Yes
11 Phillip Price Yes
 
 

Our Keynote Speaker

by 2 Comments

Carol Robles-Román

Co-President and CEO, ERA Coalition / Fund for Women’s Equality

Carol Robles-Román is the Co-President and CEO of the ERA Coalition and the Fund for Women’s Equality where she leads national efforts to advocate, educate and organize to ensure constitutional equality for women in the United States.

The ERA Coalition and the Fund for Women’s Equality are sister organizations, founded in 2014 to work respectively for passage and ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment and for greater public understanding of the need for comprehensive, fair and equal treatment of women and girls under the law.

Carol was formerly President and CEO, Legal Momentum – The Women’s Legal Defense and Education Fund Legal Momentum. She worked with big cities and organizations in gender justice, personal safety and access to justice reform. She is featured in the recent documentary about efforts to eradicate the sexual exploitation of women in “I am Jane Doe.”

She co-chairs the NYC Council Young Women’s Initiative Advisory Council, is on the National Organization for Women Advisory Board, is on the boards of the Women’s Forum of New York, and Veteran Feminists of America. She is a member of the National Football League Domestic Violence Working Group, and is a former member of the Board and Executive Committee of the City University of New York. Her recognitions include the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic and Sexual Violence 2017 Sharon L. Corbitt Award, the National Women’s Political Caucus 2015 Women of Courage Award, the SmartCEO 2014 Brava Award, and designation as one of the “100 Most Influential Hispanics” by Hispanic Business Magazine.

As Deputy Mayor for Legal Affairs and Counsel to NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg for 12 years, she spearheaded public-private partnerships in judicial administration, domestic violence, enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and human trafficking. She led the city’s efforts to combat domestic violence and human trafficking by creating Family Justice Centers and the Let’s Call an End to Human Trafficking citywide initiative. As a top executive for the NYS judiciary, she served as its first Special Inspector General for Bias Matters appointed by Chief Judge Judith Kaye and later as Special Counsel to the Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman. She served as a NYS assistant attorney general for civil rights.

Carol holds a J.D. from New York University School of Law, and a B.A. from Fordham University at Lincoln Center.