President Biden seems intent on moving his administration from the odious to the absurd. He just declared that the Equal Right Amendment is ratified: "In keeping with my oath and duty to Constitution and country, I affirm what I believe and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: The 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex."
...It is a position based on a long-rejected and frankly ridiculous foundation. It is another curious moment for self-describing champions of democracy...
Amendments by Acclamation: Democrats Move to Simply Declare the Equal Rights Amendment as RatifiedBelow is my column in the Hill on the Democratic campaign to simply declare the Equal Rights Amendment ratified as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. The question is whether raw politics is en…https://jonathanturley.org/2022/03/11/amendments-by-acclamation-democrats-move-to-simply-declare-the-equal-rights-amendment-as-ratified/
...After attempting to remove Trump from ballots and pack the Court, many on the left simply wanted Biden to declare the ERA part of the Constitution. It is another example of using any means to achieve outcomes, even having a unilateral declaration of a rejected constitutional amendment...
...As for Biden, he will finish his term following the same Oscar Wilde approach to politics: the only way to be rid of temptation is to yield to it.
...However, Biden notably stopped short of giving the left what it wanted most: an actual executive order on the ratification. He simply made a declaration and presumably left the matter up to the archivist.
• • •
Replies
It worked for the 16th Amendment which was declared "in effect" by the Secretary of State and was never ratified. Yes, we all pay income tax under a law that never was.
And it states in its own code that taxes are "voluntarily: and that taxes and property are a "gift" to the U.S. Treasury.
31 U.S. Code § 3113 - Accepting gifts
U.S. Code
(a)To provide the people of the United States with an opportunity to make gifts to the United States Government to be used to reduce the public debt—
(1)the Secretary of the Treasury may accept for the Government a gift of—
(A)money made only on the condition that it be used to reduce the public debt;
(B)an obligation of the Government included in the public debt made only on the condition that the obligation be canceled and retired and not reissued; and
(C)other intangible personal property made only on the condition that the property is sold and the proceeds from the sale used to reduce the public debt; and
(2)the Administrator of General Services may accept for the Government a gift of tangible property made only on the condition that it be sold and the proceeds from the sale be used to reduce the public debt.
(b)The Secretary and the Administrator each may reject a gift under this section when the rejection is in the interest of the Government.
(c)The Secretary and the Administrator shall convert a gift either of them accepts under subsection (a)(1)(C) or (2) of this section to money on the best terms available. If a gift accepted under subsection (a) of this section is subject to a gift or inheritance tax, the Secretary or the Administrator may pay the tax out of the proceeds of the gift or the proceeds of the redemption or sale of the gift.
(d)The Treasury has an account into which money received as gifts and proceeds from the sale or redemption of gifts under this section shall be deposited. The Secretary shall use the money in the account to pay at maturity, or to redeem or buy before maturity, an obligation of the Government included in the public debt. An obligation of the Government that is paid, redeemed, or bought with
Clip of Ways and Means Committee at 1.44 minute and 2:25. Rep. Xavier Becerra "We all know taxes are voluntary." "They participate voluntarily."
https://www.c-span.org/clip/house-committee/user-clip-income-tax-is...
Until the National Archives and the Clerk Archivist have formally announced and provided documentation to verify ratification by three-quarters (3/4) of the States, the ERA will remain a liberal pipe-dream of the Marxist left. The Office of Legal Counsel has already and definitively found on January 6, 2020 that the deadline for State ratification in the proposal clause of the ERA has irrevocably passed, and it cannot be legally and contitutionally changed or resurrected by any executive fiat, congressional action or decision of the judiciary. If the ERA is to be ratified as the 28th Amendment to our Connstitution it would require a new proposal by the Congress to start the process all over again.
I just checked a democrat site and they are calling this not legal, ust an opinion, and 'performative'.
Of course the Dems would say that. But it's important to remember that their nominee to the SCOTUS couldn't even define what a "woman" is in her confirmation hearing. One would think that's a pretty important issue, and is very relevant to the proposed ERA amendment that has been advertised by the Dems as necessary for the protection of the rights of women. The history of Article V is pretty clear in that the Congress has limited administrative obligations and options once a proposed amendment has been sent to the States for ratification. And once the States have spoken and/or the deadline for ratification has passed, that particular proposal becomes a moot/dead issue. Otherwise, proposed amendments could be held in active abeyance indefinitely until the balance of power in Congress may change in favor of any proposal that a prior Congress had authorized. Such a process would essentially grant the Congress the ability to amend the Constitution unilaterally over time, which was never contemplated or intended by the Framers in Article V.
For now
Absurdistan. However, that law uses the word, "SEX," not fricking "gender." SEX is binary. Still is. Ask Webster.
AND JOE IS STILL A "JACK ASS"
Absolutely, Richard. He might 'hee haw,' but he can't kick.