House Democrats aimed to pass the “Removing the Deadline for the Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment” on March 17, 2021, and Congresswoman Miller-Meeks voted against the bill.
The January 27, 2002, issue of Ms. Magazine features a story titled “The Equal Rights Amendment Has Been Ratified. It Is the Law: U.S. House Resolution Declares ERA the 28th Amendment” by Carrie N. Baker.
Had the ERA been added to the Constitution in 2021, the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, would have had to be reargued to consider the ERA.
I would add that the preamble to the ERA, which set a timeline, was not part of the amendment.
In fact, Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution does not allow Congress, when proposing an amendment, to set a deadline.
Furthermore, the 27th Amendment in the current U.S. Constitution was approved by Congress on September 25, 1789 (yes, 1789), but not ratified until May 7, 1992, 202 years, 7 months, and 12 days later.
Also, Article 5 does not allow a state that has approved an amendment to rescind its approval.
On February 2, 1972, The Daily Iowan published a story on page 5 titled “Go East, young woman.”
Pregnant women in Johnson County and elsewhere in Iowa were traveling to New York City for abortions, as abortion was illegal in Iowa at the time.
Later that semester, a woman in a philosophy course asked me to take good notes for her while she was away. She was volunteering to accompany another woman to New York for an abortion. I took the notes and gave them to her when she returned.
Since that time, I have been a pro-choice male.
Congresswoman Miller-Meeks voted against the Ensuring Access to Abortion Act, which would have allowed women to travel outside their state to obtain an abortion.
By doing so, she would take away from Iowa women a right they had in 1972 — 52 years ago.
In Texas, there are moves to prevent pregnant women from leaving the state to obtain abortions.
In Idaho, Republicans have enacted a bill allowing the families of a rapist to sue his victim if she becomes pregnant from the rape and gets an abortion.
Congresswoman Miller-Meeks also voted against H.R. 8373, the Right to Contraception Act.
Republicans as a whole oppose contraceptives, so if they win, the next time you see a “Trojan” in Iowa City, it might be when USC shows up to play football.
In her PBS debate with Christina Bohannan, Congresswoman Miller-Meeks claimed she had been pro-life since 2008.
Miller-Meeks lied.
In a 2018 Republican primary debate, she said, “I am also Catholic, I am pro-choice… Ultimately, as a doctor and healthcare provider, I think these decisions are best left to providers, doctors, and patients. I don’t want the government in my healthcare decisions.”
That debate is available on YouTube. 2018 was after 2008.
In the same 2018 debate, then-candidate Miller-Meeks also supported birth control.
I would also point out that Congresswoman Miller-Meeks voted against putting the Equal Rights Amendment, which has been ratified by the required number of states, into the U.S. Constitution.
Republicans have opposed the ERA being added to the Constitution because, when the amendment was passed, it contained a preamble limiting the time for it to be approved. That clause is not part of the amendment.
In fact, Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which provides for amending the Constitution, states:
- Congress, when proposing an amendment, is not allowed to set a time frame for ratification.
- Article 5 does not allow a state that has approved an amendment to rescind its approval.
But then again, we have a Supreme Court that seems to think they are writers, not interpreters, of the Constitution. After all, the word “immunity” is not in the Constitution. The justices had to metaphorically pull out their 1800 quill pens to write “immunity” into the Constitution. So much for “original intent.”
Allow me to point out that the 27th Amendment was proposed on September 25, 1789, and ratified on May 7, 1982, 202 years, 7 months, and 12 days after it was passed by Congress.
Also, the article’s January 27, 2022, publication date is just five months before the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs case, which overturned Roe v. Wade.
Had the ERA been added to the Constitution when it received the requisite number of votes by the states, it would have had to be considered in the Dobbs case, potentially changing the decision.
– Michael Lamb