Federal Appeals Court Rules Against “Equal Rights Amendment”

Phyllis Schafly, founder of Eagle Forum, was a longtime opponent of the federal Equal Rights Amendment.

On Wednesday a three-judge panel for the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously dismissed a lawsuit attempting to enact the federal Equal Rights Amendment.

The federal Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) would amend the U.S. Constitution. The amendment reads, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

Congress referred the amendment to the state legislatures for ratification in 1972, agreeing to add the amendment to the constitution if 38 states ratified it by 1979. However, only 35 state legislatures ratified the Equal Rights Amendment by the deadline, and five states that ratified the amendment later revoked their ratifications.

The Equal Rights Amendment is intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex, but the way it is worded could cause it to have a number of unintended consequences.

The ERA arguably would erase all distinctions between men and women in federal law.

That could affect everything from college fraternities and sororities at public universities to how men and women are housed in federal prisons to labor laws that protect women in the workplace to girls’ and boys’ athletics at public schools.

States that have enacted measures similar to the ERA have even been forced to pay for abortions with taxpayer funds. In a 2019 letter, the ACLU told Congress that “the Equal Rights Amendment could provide an additional layer of protection against restrictions on abortion.”

It’s important for men and women to have equal rights under the law, but the ERA simply carries too many unintended consequences.

That’s why major groups like National Right to Life, Concerned Women for America, and Eagle Forum oppose the federal Equal Rights Amendment.

That’s why Family Council has opposed efforts to ratify the ERA in Arkansas as well.

And that’s why it’s good to see federal courts dismissing efforts to implement the federal Equal Rights Amendment.

Biden Administration Challenges Arkansas’ SAFE Act

On Thursday President Biden’s U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest opposing Arkansas’ Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act in federal court.

The SAFE Act is a 2021 law that protects children in Arkansas from sex-reassignment procedures, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones.

The DOJ’s statement filed on Thursday calls sex-reassignment procedures “life-saving care” and argues that the SAFE Act violates the U.S. Constitution.

The brief also claims that Arkansas’ reasons for supporting the SAFE Act are “mere pretext for animus against transgender minors” — in other words, that Arkansas’ policymakers must secretly be motivated by hate instead of a desire to help children.

But as we have said time and time again, researchers do not know the long term effects puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones can have on kids.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has never approved puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for the purpose of gender transition. Doctors are giving these hormones to kids off-label, in a manner the FDA never intended.

That is why many experts agree that giving puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children is experimental, at best.

That’s also why a major hospital in Sweden announced earlier this year that it would no longer administer puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children.

It is deeply disappointing that the federal government would use taxpayer dollars to oppose a law that protects children from experimentation. Fortunately, Arkansas’ Attorney General’s office is fighting back, and we believe that federal courts will uphold this good law.

Read The DOJ’s Statement of Interest Opposing the SAFE Act Here.

More Evidence Arkansas Was Right to Pass the SAFE Act

On May 5, Sweden’s Karolinska Hospital announced it would no longer give puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children under the age of 16.

For children ages 16 – 18, the hospital’s new policy says, “treatment may only occur within the clinical trial settings approved by the EPM (Ethical Review Agency/Swedish Institutional Review Board). The patient must receive comprehensive information about potential risks of the treatment, and a careful assessment of the patient’s maturity level must be conducted to determine if the patient is capable of taking an informed stance on, and consenting to, the treatment.”

The policy also notes that giving puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children “should be regarded as experimental.”

In the U.S., the FDA has never approved puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for the purpose of gender transition. Doctors do not know the long term effects puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones can have on kids.

That is why many people equate them with experimenting on children.

That’s also why earlier this year the Arkansas Legislature voted overwhelmingly to pass Act 626 (H.B. 1570), the Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act.

This good law by Rep. Robin Lundstrum (R – Springdale) and Sen. Alan Clark (R – Lonsdale) prohibits sex-reassignment procedures on children. The law also prevents funding of sex-reassignment procedures performed on children.

Act 626 will protect children in Arkansas from being subjected to surgeries and procedures that can leave them sterilized and permanently scarred.

The fact that one of Sweden’s leading hospitals is no longer giving puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones to kids is just more evidence that Arkansas was right to pass the SAFE Act.