[Publius]

In NOW v. Idaho, a federal district court ruled that the ratification window for the ERA closed in March 1979. Congress' attempt to extend the ratification window to 1982 was unconstitutional because Congress used the legislative process, not the amendatory process as the Constitution requires. Should Congress wish to revive the ERA, it will have to resubmit it to the states for ratification by a two thirds vote of the House and Senate.

NOW v. Idaho was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court, neither of which was willing to grant cert, i.e., hear the case. What this suit is requesting is that the Supreme Court overturn its 1921 ruling in Dillon v. Gloss, the case that established Congress' relationship to the amendatory process. Such a ruling would throw the amendatory process into complete and utter constitutional chaos, which is why this case will never get to the Supreme Court.

[tet68]

complete and utter constitutional chaos,

That is what they have been working toward for over
100 years.

Look at what they’ve done to our institutions, our
electoral process is being put in doubt, our children
are being taught to distrust our form of government
and even their own parents.

God help us secure our nation from further depredations.

[TexasGurl24]

There are Obama lunatics posing as judges who have judicial authority. The DC Circuit and 4th Circuit are stacked with them. This is going to have to go to SCOTUS because if an Obama judge hears this, they are going to ignore the law and Constitution.

[gleeaikin]

Yesterday the House of Reps. approved removing the deadline on the ERA. The question is whether the Senate and the President are willing to anger women in an election year. From your comment it appears the Supreme Court is likely to duck this.