Question

FREE-RESPONSE QUESTION

Soon after woman gained protection for the right to vote, some women's groups redirected their efforts toward ensuring equality in all areas of American life. They called for an “Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)” that would guarantee equality under the law between men and women a right under the Constitution. It read "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." The ERA was proposed by Congress in 1972 but failed to achieve ratification by the 1979 deadline. Congress passed and then-President Carter signed into law an extension of the deadline to 1982; the legitimacy of this extension is disputed. Some states revoked their ratifications. Since 2017, several states have ratified the ERA, but again these approvals are in question. Supporters of the ERA point to continued issues of sex discrimination that the amendment could provide grounds for addressing and challenging in the courts if necessary. Opponents point to traditional gender roles in American life and how the ERA could threaten certain protections for women and families with children. They also note the various laws and court cases that have addressed issues of sex discrimination already, while supporters of the ERA say that the piecemeal approach to gender equality through lawmaking and individual court cases takes too long and is incomplete.
After closely reading the scenario, respond to the following in complete sentences:
Referring to the scenario in your response, describe how the principle of separation of powers or checks and balances relates to this effort to amend the Constitution.
Referring to the scenario in your response, explain how the principle from part A is addressed in Federalist No. 51.
Referring to the scenario in your response, explain how the Supreme Court's power of judicial review could affect how this amendment would be applied going forward if it were ratified.

Answer 1

The principle of separation of powers or checks and balances relates to the effort to amend the Constitution by ensuring that no single branch of government has complete control over the amendment process. In this case, Congress proposed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), but it required ratification by the states to become part of the Constitution. This division of power between the legislative branch (Congress) and the states reflects the principle of checks and balances.

In Federalist No. 51, James Madison discusses the importance of checks and balances in maintaining the separation of powers. He argues that by structuring the government with separate branches and giving each branch the ability to check the powers of the others, it helps prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful. This principle is relevant to the effort to amend the Constitution because it ensures that the proposed amendment goes through a rigorous process, involving both Congress and the states, to prevent any one group from having undue influence.

If the Equal Rights Amendment were ratified and became part of the Constitution, the Supreme Court's power of judicial review could affect how it is applied going forward. The Court would have the authority to interpret the language and intent of the amendment, and it could hear cases related to sex discrimination and determine whether certain laws or practices violate the amendment. The Court's decisions would shape the interpretation and application of the amendment over time, potentially influencing the scope and impact of gender equality in American life.