Though Presidents hold no authority to greenlight constitutional amendments, the recent claim by President Biden, asserting the fact that the Equal Rights Amendment is now embodied in the Constitution, raises the question of the potential implications of such a proclamation. Regardless of his espoused belief, it must be noted that Biden’s remarks carry zero legal weight, with the tangible effects of such a statement remaining murky at best.
Biden, in a questionable attempt to elevate sex equality to a fundamental principle, brazenly declared himself a believer in the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, mere days before his term reached its end. His statement humored the idea that the Equal Rights Amendment now forms an integral part of the Constitution, thereby fulfilling the conditions for ratification.
In a public demonstration of his apparent allegiance to the Constitution and the nation, Biden claimed to endorse the view held by three-fourths of the states, recognizing the 28th Amendment as the new law of the land. Touting equal rights and protections for all Americans, irrespective of their sex, Biden’s declaration seems like an empty act of political posturing, as his statement bears no legislative implications on its own.
Comically, despite Biden’s hollow announcement, it remained uncertain what concrete impact his proclamation could possibly have. The President’s role is simply ceremonial regarding the approval of constitutional amendments, and without accompanying actions, Biden’s pronouncement lacks any legal clout.
In a reality check to Biden’s exaggerated belief, the United States’ archivist, who happens to be a Biden appointee, categorically stated that she won’t document the amendment. Dismissing Biden’s eagerness, she maintained that the amendment did not fulfill the necessary standards for being incorporated into the Constitution.
In fact, Biden did not even dare to issue a directive to his own appointee to wrap up the process by publishing the amendment. This glaring omission only reinforces the ambiguity and confusion surrounding this ‘historic’ announcement. Thus, questions about what this so-called declaration might signify continue to linger.
The status of the 28th Amendment is indicative of the ongoing indecisiveness. The legitimacy of the Equal Rights Amendment remains a controversial topic. Although the Constitution’s amendment procedures require two-thirds approval from both Congress houses, this step was fulfilled over half a century ago.
Moreover, the amendment mandates ratification by three-quarters of the states. Interestingly, this stage was not accomplished until the year 2020, when Virginia confirmed itself as the 38th state subscribing to this stance. However, the journey of the amendment doesn’t end here. It is fraught with complications.
The legislative process hit a stumbling block when Congress established a time constraint for state ratification while sanctioning the Equal Rights Amendment back in 1972. This period was initially set to seven years, which was later extended to ten years.
Despite the extended timeline, as of 1982, only 35 states had verified their agreement with the proposed amendment. This backdrop only magnifies the hollowness of Biden’s claim, which is more an act of desperation rather than a thoughtful constitutional initiative.
The premature celebration by Biden suggests a failure to grasp the intricacies of the constitutional amendment process. This sheds light on the spurious nature of his declaration, further eroding public trust in his capabilities as a leader.
By failing to even persuade his appointee to finalize the amendment’s publication, Biden has exposed a noticeable flaw in his administration’s ability to effectively execute policy decisions. The archivist’s refusal to publish the amendment certainly highlights this awkward chain of command.
Twisting the real scenario to fit his political narrative, Biden has plunged into an ill-thought decision without considering its long-term implications. The repercussions of this pose significant risks to his reputation and further highlight his attempts to distort constitutional practices.
All this unnecessary confusion and uncertainty ultimately arise from Biden’s eagerness to bask in the glory of a significant constitutional amendment. However, his hasty declarations and lackluster follow-through have only resulted in public puzzlement, discarding the seriousness of the amendment process.
Biden’s actions serve as a glaring misstep evidencing the inefficiencies of his administration. His inability to secure the publication of the amendment by his appointed archivist adds yet another layer of uncertainty. This lack of coordination reflects badly on his administrative competence.
Thus, Biden’s effort to frame the Equal Rights Amendment as a landmark victory comes across more as politically-driven posturing rather than genuine advocacy for sex equality. This move, far from being symbolic or significant, only exposes Biden’s desperate need to project an image of a progressive ruler with a distorted perception of constitutional practice.