King Joe and Queen Kamala have spoken
The topic? The dearly departed Equal Rights Amendment. I remember having to write about the ERA back in law school – and believe me, that was a long time ago.
Those two brilliant lawyers, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, seem to think they can revive it by fiat.
Actually, I don’t believe they really think that – although who knows what Joe thinks these days? They’re just messing with our minds in order to move the Overton window. The fact that they’re both saying this means it was orchestrated by the person or persons who have been orchestrating so very much during this administration.
And so we have this from Joe Biden:
Today I'm affirming what I have long believed and what three-fourths of the states have ratified:
The 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex. pic.twitter.com/oZtS6Q89zG
— President Biden (@POTUS) January 17, 2025
And this from Kamala Harris:
The Equal Rights Amendment is the 28th Amendment, and it is the law of the land. pic.twitter.com/jl1Ewg2JAf
— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) January 17, 2025
And this from lawyers such as Jonathan Turley:
President Biden's recognition of the ERA as the 28th Amendment is the constitutional version of announcing that "I see dead people," but more unnerving. It takes an utter disregard for the constitutional process as well as reality…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 17, 2025
Today I’m affirming
What I’ve long believed
And what most all sane folk know:
That Joe is a nullity nulling numbskull
On the take for the grease
For years our government has been run by people who think that if they speak the words, and everyone hears the words, then they have changed reality. This is just the latest iteration.
Both Biden and Harris are lawyers. Both suck at it.
Sen. Gillibrand, one of the harridans shrieking at Pete Hegseth, posted on X to encourage women in conservative states to sue to overturn “unconstitutional” restrictions now that the 28th Amendment was “law.” Gillibrand is also a lawyer.
Looks like this is a really dumb effort to overturn the Dobbs decision.
This is good news. Disconnection from reality greatly hinders the effectiveness of an enemy’s actions.
“They’re just messing with our minds in order to move the Overton window.” Bullseye.
And given the predictable acquiescence of the legacy / mainstream media, they may well succeed in reigniting discussion of the E.R.A.
I remember way back in the day when ERA was being debated that opponents were saying that it could lead to unisex bathrooms, sports, etc. Its proponents said that was ridiculous. Well it all happened without the ERA.
Open contempt for the Constitution, and why? To give the pussyhat crowd something new to scream in front of the cameras.
ERA — egregiously ridiculous announcement
— extremely radical aspiration
— earth rotating (on its) axis
— evading reality again [4th time was a charm, I think]
I can see moving the Overton Window as a motive, also another Farewell FU.
However, I do wonder if this last-minute stuff — pardoning Hunter, medals for people like Soros, and now this 28th Amendment bluff — makes the Biden administration look even more clownish and corrupt to voters, and it will backfire against Democrats as they attempt to rebuild their party for future elections.
Surely they are not going to pretend that the 28th Amendment is actually now part of the Constitution except Evil Dictator Trump exceeded his power and took it out.
I’ve wondered about this.
Now that it can’t effect the just past Presidential election, MSM sources are starting to report what they kept hidden until now, just how bad Biden’s mental deterioration was, and how far back its started.
I’ve often thought that Biden’s radical leftist handlers just thought up the most radical things that they wanted to accomplish, crafted Executive Orders to attain those goals, and slapped them down in front of a brain dead President Biden for him to sign or, perhaps, they presented Biden with a stack of “routine” things to sign, these E.O.s included in the stack, each item of which Biden didn’t bother to–or couldn’t read and fully comprehend.
Since there are reports that Biden doesn’t remember that he signed certain Executive Orders, would it be possible to attack their validity on the basis that Biden was “non compos mentis” when he signed them, making these E.O.s invalid.*
Or, could this line of attack also be pursued against any of the legislation which Biden has signed into law?
* See https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2025/01/18/jd-vances-tweet-to-joe-biden-n2650766
Snow on Pine, we’d have a hard time “proving” Biden signed without understanding. Better to reverse things he signed by executive order or legislation.
Kate, I agree the proof is a problem. As often the case.
But I wish the John Hur report could be used as a basis, or starting point, or more.
Stating essentially Biden is too senile to be held accountable should be good for SOMEthing!
In my fantasy, that is,
LoL.
The Center for American Progress is the _the_ central clearing house of Democratic/Progressive lobbying and thinking, and has been for decades. On the subject of the ERA:
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-era-solidifies-womens-rights-in-the-constitution-as-the-28th-amendment/
Note that they’re pretending this is real. This reinforces the idea that Joe, yet again, is simply a mouthpiece. He’s just not there anymore, everything he’s supposedly doing and apparently saying during these last days is simply him being a sock puppet. The clemencies, the regulations, the ‘amendment’, all of it.
(I’m not saying he would necessarily disagree with any of it if he _was_ there, but as it stands it doesn’t matter if he would or not.)
I look for the Left to try legal actions at some point based on the ’28th Amendment’ in sympathetic courts, the Trump Admin must be ready to stomp hard on such efforts, both legally and in PR terms. I’m not 100% certain they’ll try it, it’ll probably depend on how they ‘read the room’ in political terms, but the idea is in their minds, I have no doubt about that.
The Atlantic has an interesting article, sympathetic to the ERA but not delusional that is now a new legal amendment.
_____________________________________
All of their [ERA] efforts have failed. In 2021, a federal judge dismissed a case brought by two states seeking to have the ERA recognized; two years later, an appellate court affirmed the ruling. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a staunch supporter of the ERA, opposed the effort, saying in 2020 that advocates needed “to start over” because the deadline had elapsed. In 2021, the House passed a resolution to repeal the deadline, but it never cleared the Senate. And just last month, the archivist, Colleen Shogan, and the deputy archivist, William Bosanko, issued a statement saying that they could not legally publish the ERA, citing “established legal, judicial, and procedural decisions.”
As a last resort, ERA backers have urged Biden to simply instruct the archivist to publish it anyway.
–“That’s Not How Constitutional Amendments Work”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/no-biden-can-t-change-the-constitution/ar-AA1xovTT
_____________________________________
So I’d say the Biden/Harris announcement was a consolation prize to feminists and an FU to the country.
Win-win.
One (among many) odd things about the Biden “declaration” is that the president has no role in constitutional amendments. Amendments are proposed by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and then must be ratified by three-fourths of the states. (The alternative of a constitutional convention has never been tried.) The president has no role in the process at all.
huxley on January 18, 2025 at 11:34 pm:
“I do wonder if this last-minute stuff … makes the Biden administration look even more clownish and corrupt to voters, and it will backfire against Democrats as they attempt to rebuild their party for future elections.”
Given the 6 (to 16?) staffers supporting Biden in his bubble, I could see them colluding on an FU to the Republican voters who ousted the Dem’s from power AND an FU to the Dem Party leadership that kaboshed their continued potential gravy train for 4 more years.
But on the latter option they would really have had to be pretty delusional themselves.
Equivalent to “woman scorned”… and all that ?
Readers added context:
“He’s full of shit.”
It’s another episode in an a process. Each generation of ‘progressives’ has less and less of an interest in truth (“I say it’s spinach”) and less and less of an interest in conscientious regard for procedure. It’s all about what they want, NOW.
==
Pet peeve of mine: you have rights in your capacity as a person and you have rights in your capacity as a citizen. You can have rights in your capacity as a party to an agreement or contract. You do not have rights in your capacity as a woman. Rights are commonly contingent on considerations of status. Whether you are a citizen or not. Whether you have reached your majority or not. Whether you are deemed competent or not. Whether you have suffered a disgrace (e.g. a criminal conviction or a bankruptcy or a civil judgment for fraud) or not. Whether you are married or not. The question is invariably (1) what is a right, (2) what sort of law defines the right, and (3) given that, in what way does your status as a woman regulate your possession or exercise of the right..