npr.org
Biden Declares ERA "Law of the Land," Defying Archivist and Reigniting Legal Battle
President Biden declared the Equal Rights Amendment "the law of the land" on Friday, despite the National Archives' refusal to certify it due to a missed ratification deadline and the executive branch's lack of direct authority in the amendment process. This action, celebrated by supporters, has sparked renewed legal debate.
- What is the immediate impact of President Biden's declaration on the Equal Rights Amendment's legal status?
- President Biden declared the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) "the law of the land," despite lacking formal legal effect. This declaration, celebrated by ERA supporters, is not legally binding and doesn't compel the Archivist to publish the amendment. The White House clarified that the Archivist's role is ministerial, requiring publication only upon valid ratification.
- What are the underlying legal controversies surrounding the ERA's ratification, and how does Biden's declaration affect them?
- Biden's statement follows years of legal controversy surrounding the ERA's ratification deadline. While the Archivist previously refused certification citing legal opinions, Biden's assertion contradicts these opinions and introduces new legal questions. This action directly challenges existing legal interpretations and reignites debate around the ERA's constitutional status.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of Biden's declaration, considering possible legal challenges and the involvement of the courts?
- Biden's late-term declaration creates uncertainty about the ERA's future. While it may embolden supporters and influence legal challenges, it also risks further delaying the process. The outcome hinges on whether courts or Congress will intervene, impacting the timeline and potential for the ERA's enactment.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the narrative around President Biden's surprise declaration, highlighting the celebratory reaction from supporters. This emphasis, particularly in the opening sentence, directs the reader's attention toward the political drama surrounding the event, rather than a thorough examination of the legal complexities or the actual content of the amendment. The use of phrases like "surprising declaration" and "last-minute move" may subtly influence the reader's perception of the action.
Language Bias
The article largely employs neutral language, but the use of phrases such as "surprising declaration," "last-minute move," and "celebrated by its backers" subtly conveys a sense of unexpectedness and political maneuvering, potentially influencing the reader's interpretation. While not overtly biased, these choices create a slightly more dramatic and potentially less objective tone. More neutral alternatives could be: 'unprecedented statement', 'recent action', and 'supported by advocates'.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the legal and political controversy surrounding the ERA, and President Biden's statement. While it mentions the ERA's content (guaranteeing equal rights regardless of sex), it doesn't delve into the potential societal impact of its passage or its implications for various groups. Further, the article omits discussion of counterarguments against the ERA, focusing primarily on the perspectives of supporters. This omission creates an unbalanced narrative and may leave the reader with an incomplete understanding of the issue's complexities.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as a simple conflict between President Biden's declaration and the Archivist's refusal to certify the ERA. It overlooks the nuanced legal arguments and the potential for multiple pathways for the ERA to be ratified, such as congressional action or judicial review. The framing simplifies a complex issue into a binary 'for' or 'against' position.
Gender Bias
The article mentions Kirsten Gillibrand's involvement, but her gender is not explicitly emphasized beyond a neutral mention of her title and political affiliation. The article focuses on the political and legal aspects of the issue, rather than gender dynamics. While there is an absence of gender bias, there's also a missed opportunity to highlight the specific implications of the ERA for women's rights.
Sustainable Development Goals
President Biden's declaration, while not legally binding, expresses strong political support for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which aims to guarantee equal rights regardless of sex. This directly advances gender equality by signaling the administration's commitment to the ERA's principles and potentially influencing future legal challenges and public discourse. The statement adds momentum to the ongoing efforts to ensure women have equal rights under the law.