closeVideoFox News Flash top headlines for Feb. 13
Fox-News-Flash-top-headlines are here. Check out what you click on Foxnews.com.
The house has taken steps to revive again on Thursday, which proposed to remove the Equal rights Amendment to the vote, the 1982 deadline for state ratification, and open the process to change the Constitution, to discrimination, say on grounds of sex.
“There is no expiration date on equality,” said the democratic Republic of the Jackie Speier of California, the resolution of the sponsor.
Almost 50 years after it was first approved by the Congress and to the States, the Equal rights Amendment “is just as distinctive as always,” Speier said. “For the survivors of sexual violence, pregnancy discrimination, unequal pay, and more, the fight for equal justice under the law can’t wait any longer.”
DOJ UNDERCUTS EFFORTS TO REVIVE THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT, GRATIFYING THAT THE PRO-LIFE GROUPS
The house approved the resolution, 232-183, sending it to the Senate. Five Republicans — all men — joined 227 Democrats to support the measure. No Democrat objected.
Despite support in the house, the debate has for strange bedfellows on the other side. Both Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – a liberal icon – and house Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., have spoken to resuscitate against attempts the change.
Ginsburg said on Monday that they supported an Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, she thinks it would be better for Congress to begin the attempt to pass it, instead of counting on the breathing of life in the failed attempt of the 1970s.
“I would like to see, a new beginning,” Ginsburg said during an event at Georgetown law school in Washington. “I want to start from the beginning.”
McCarthy on Thursday echoed Ginsburg’s comments.
“My position is the same as Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” he said. “The time has expired. … You have to start from the beginning.”
ALYSSA MILANO COMMENTS ON THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT HEARINGS IN THE NEW VIDEO
Democrats did not address Ginsburg’s argument directly, but said at the Capitol event on Wednesday and during the debate on Thursday, that it is absurd to suggest that women are too late to win equality.
“It should not be a time limit, the said equality,” Rep. Jennifer Wexton, D-Va., a former state legislator, the celebrated Virginia’s adoption of the amendment in the last month.
“Thanks to the tireless work of so many pioneers and activists in the course of the years, in the case of women contain finally – a step closer in our nation’s founding document,” she said.
Congress has the amendment, which guaranteed men and women equal rights before the law, the United States in 1972. It gave States seven years to ratify it, later on, an extension of the deadline to 1982. But the amendment was not ratified by the required three-quarters of the member States before the expiry of the time limit.
Last month, however, Virginia legislators, the amendment to the 38th and last state voted to ratify, is necessary. The Ministry of justice has said, it is too late, and a trial is now underway.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called passage of the resolution, long overdue, that Congress is voting soon to observe the 100th anniversary of women’s right.
And yet “the ERA is not yet enshrined in the Constitution,” the California Democrat said. “As a result, women still face inequality under the law of the gender wage gap, pregnancy discrimination, sexual harassment, and, again, what are women under-represented on the table.”
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP
In addition to Virginia, Nevada and Illinois to ratify also agreed to, the amendment in the last three years. Five States have moved to the resignation of its previous permits.
Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said Democrats were trying to “rewrite history” by the revival of the ERA to three-quarters of the States ratified it by the 1982 deadline.
“The Congress has no constitutional authority to retroactively revive a failed amendment to the Constitution,” he said.
“If you support the language of the 1972 ERA,” he added, “you have only one constitutional option, and start the whole process over again and make your case to the current voters nationwide.”
Fox News’ Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.