ERA_No_Shortcuts
@ERANoShortcuts
Followers
395
Following
110
Media
2K
Statuses
4K
Tracking federal ERA in Congress, Exec Branch, courts from an ERA-skeptical view. Judges named by Obama, Trump, and Biden have all said the ERA is not ratified.
Washington, D.C.
Joined December 2019
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT REPORT: For 2024, an updated 23-page "Special Report on the Equal Rights Amendment" from NRLC, covering developments in the federal courts, Executive Branch, Congress, elections, and the media, relating to the ERA-revival campaign. https://t.co/ceOo014AF0
0
12
11
@EqualMeansEqual suggests that "Colleen Shogun" (Shogan), recently interviewed by NewsHour, failed in her duty when, as Archivist, she declined to certify the ERA as part of the Constitution. But since 2020, 18 federal judges have turned away or rejected claims ERA was ratified.
0
1
0
@EqualMeansEqual suggests that "Colleen Shogun" (Shogan), recently interviewed by NewsHour, failed in her duty when, as Archivist, she declined to certify the ERA as part of the Constitution. But since 2020, 18 federal judges have turned away or rejected claims ERA was ratified.
0
1
0
ERA CULT WATCH @EqualMeansEqual is trying to gin up emails to @NewsHour's @nickmassella, complaining that NewsHour recently failed to recognize that the Equal Rights Amendment is part of the Constitution. Maybe that's because the claim is now widely recognized as false. (cont.)
1
0
0
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
0
4
5
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
0
4
5
@ERANoShortcuts @the_bs_hour @Fonz476again Thanks for the update. Indeed, the 9th Circuit's July 17, 2025, ruling in Valame v. Trump dismissed the ERA-based challenge to male-only Selective Service registration, rejecting the claim that the ERA was ratified as "meritless." This affirms the law's constitutionality under
0
1
0
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT BIZARRO WORLD With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment manufacture ever more far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA magically becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from @KatrinasDream piles
0
1
0
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT BIZARRO WORLD With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment manufacture ever more far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA magically becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from @KatrinasDream piles
0
1
0
An organization that doesn't know how many amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been ratified, should not be the accrediting authority for law schools.
The Texas Supreme Court has stripped the ABA of its role as accreditor of law schools for purposes of bar admission in the state. https://t.co/T3RYBfc9lD
0
1
2
An organization that doesn't know how many amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been ratified, should not be the accrediting authority for law schools.
The Texas Supreme Court has stripped the ABA of its role as accreditor of law schools for purposes of bar admission in the state. https://t.co/T3RYBfc9lD
0
1
2
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. @EqualMeansEqual falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is they think a man is intruding on their turf. Since ERA failed, both lawsuits will too.
0
2
0
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. @EqualMeansEqual falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is they think a man is intruding on their turf. Since ERA failed, both lawsuits will too.
0
2
0
6) It appears that the real basis for the EME-Murphy attacks are not Valame's actual legal arguments, which they distort, but his sex. In a July 2025 interview, Valame was asked about EME's assertions that "it is imperative" that an ERA case be led by women (i.e., by them).
1
1
0
@EqualMeansEqual 15) A reader pointed out that in his Motion for Summary Judgment, submitted to the federal district court on Sept. 15, 2023, Vikram Valame said the ERA "contains an 'absolute' and 'self-executing' prohibition on sex-based classifications..." So, stricter than "strict scrutiny."
1
0
0
14) A PDF transcript of the entire five-minute @EqualMeansEqual video message, from which the above clip is taken, is available at the link below. https://t.co/xNNTszTnDo
drive.google.com
1
0
0
13) Here is the clip from the September 16, 2025 video sent out by @EqualMeansEqual, in which @WMurphyLaw erroneously asserted that only her lawsuit "even mentions" the ERA, and that it is "the only one asking the court to validate the ERA."
2
0
0
12) But then, since the 1972 ERA expired decades ago; no federal court will ever apply it under any standard of review. On July 17, 2025, a unanimous panel of the 9th Circuit said, "We reject as meritless Valame's contention that the Equal Rights Amendment was ratified..."
1
0
0
11) pro-ERA academics actually asserted that the ERA would impose an ABSOLUTE or near-absolute barrier to FACIALLY sex-based classifications (such as the male-only registration law), while strict scrutiny would apply to unique-physical-characteristic or disparate impact cases.
1
0
0
10) There is wide agreement that the ERA (had it been ratified--it was not) would require application of AT LEAST strict scrutiny to sex-based classifications. However, in hearings on the ERA before a U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee in 1983,
1
0
0