ERA_No_Shortcuts
@eranoshortcuts.bsky.social
The only account tracking the 1972 federal ERA in courts, Executive Branch, & Congress, with viewpoint skeptical of ERA-revival claims. Judges named by Presidents Obama, Trump, and Biden have, without exception, rejected claims the ERA has been ratified.
Pinned
Analysis | Biden declares there is now a 28th Amendment. There is not.
A 28th Amendment has not suddenly been appended to the Constitution per the president’s decree.
www.washingtonpost.com
"Federal judges have repeatedly ruled in ways that suggest the deadline is valid....the rulings we do have tilt strongly against the Biden position....Then-Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg...suggested in 2020 that the argument didn’t make sense."
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED, 9TH CIRCUIT PANEL HOLDS IN UNANIMOUS PUBLISHED OPINION
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
November 5, 2025 at 12:22 AM
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED, 9TH CIRCUIT PANEL HOLDS IN UNANIMOUS PUBLISHED OPINION
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
9) held that this attempted retroactive modification was unconstitutional on two different grounds. Since no additional states ratified the ERA during the purported 39-month "deadline extension," the U.S. Supreme Court later dismissed the matter as moot.
November 5, 2025 at 12:22 AM
9) held that this attempted retroactive modification was unconstitutional on two different grounds. Since no additional states ratified the ERA during the purported 39-month "deadline extension," the U.S. Supreme Court later dismissed the matter as moot.
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
9th Cir. rejects claim that the requirement that men register with the Selective Service System, but not women, violates the ERA.
Held: the ERA has not been ratified and published or certified by the Archivist.
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
Held: the ERA has not been ratified and published or certified by the Archivist.
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
November 4, 2025 at 8:00 PM
9th Cir. rejects claim that the requirement that men register with the Selective Service System, but not women, violates the ERA.
Held: the ERA has not been ratified and published or certified by the Archivist.
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
Held: the ERA has not been ratified and published or certified by the Archivist.
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED, 9TH CIRCUIT PANEL HOLDS IN UNANIMOUS PUBLISHED OPINION
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
November 5, 2025 at 12:22 AM
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED, 9TH CIRCUIT PANEL HOLDS IN UNANIMOUS PUBLISHED OPINION
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
A 🧵
1) A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit today (November 4, 2025) unanimously ruled, in a published opinion, that the Equal Rights Amendment is not part of the U.S. Constitution.
VALAME SEEKS E.R.A. REHEARING
1) In Valame v. Trump, Vikram Valame on 8-28-25 filed a petition asking for rehearing by the 9th Circuit panel that on July 17 "reject[ed] as meritless Valame's contention that the Equal Right Amendment was ratified as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution."
1) In Valame v. Trump, Vikram Valame on 8-28-25 filed a petition asking for rehearing by the 9th Circuit panel that on July 17 "reject[ed] as meritless Valame's contention that the Equal Right Amendment was ratified as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution."
November 4, 2025 at 1:31 PM
VALAME SEEKS E.R.A. REHEARING
1) In Valame v. Trump, Vikram Valame on 8-28-25 filed a petition asking for rehearing by the 9th Circuit panel that on July 17 "reject[ed] as meritless Valame's contention that the Equal Right Amendment was ratified as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution."
1) In Valame v. Trump, Vikram Valame on 8-28-25 filed a petition asking for rehearing by the 9th Circuit panel that on July 17 "reject[ed] as meritless Valame's contention that the Equal Right Amendment was ratified as the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution."
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
The Biden Justice Dept. rejected the claim that the ERA has been ratified. Since Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution; 13 were named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans. 9th Circuit: "meritless."
October 7, 2025 at 11:57 AM
The Biden Justice Dept. rejected the claim that the ERA has been ratified. Since Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution; 13 were named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans. 9th Circuit: "meritless."
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT MEDIA WATCH
The activist group "Equal Means Equal" wants to gin up emails to @pbsnews.org, complaining that NewsHour recently failed to recognize the ERA as part of the Constitution. Maybe that's because the claim is now widely recognized as false, if not delusional? (cont.)
The activist group "Equal Means Equal" wants to gin up emails to @pbsnews.org, complaining that NewsHour recently failed to recognize the ERA as part of the Constitution. Maybe that's because the claim is now widely recognized as false, if not delusional? (cont.)
October 14, 2025 at 1:18 PM
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT MEDIA WATCH
The activist group "Equal Means Equal" wants to gin up emails to @pbsnews.org, complaining that NewsHour recently failed to recognize the ERA as part of the Constitution. Maybe that's because the claim is now widely recognized as false, if not delusional? (cont.)
The activist group "Equal Means Equal" wants to gin up emails to @pbsnews.org, complaining that NewsHour recently failed to recognize the ERA as part of the Constitution. Maybe that's because the claim is now widely recognized as false, if not delusional? (cont.)
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. Equal Means Equal (EME) falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is a man intruding on their turf. (Both the Valame and EME lawsuits will fail, since there is no ERA.)
September 25, 2025 at 5:51 PM
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. Equal Means Equal (EME) falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is a man intruding on their turf. (Both the Valame and EME lawsuits will fail, since there is no ERA.)
THE LAST AMENDMENT
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
October 12, 2025 at 5:44 PM
THE LAST AMENDMENT
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
"Some amendments have prescribed time limits for ratification, but the congressional pay amendment did not....That was our last amendment [the 27th, 1992], so the Constitution has now gone for decades without change."--Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Listening to the Law, pp. 149-150.
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT BIZARRO WORLD
With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment dream up increasingly far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from Katrina's Dream piles delusional premises four-deep...
With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment dream up increasingly far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from Katrina's Dream piles delusional premises four-deep...
September 30, 2025 at 1:49 PM
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT BIZARRO WORLD
With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment dream up increasingly far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from Katrina's Dream piles delusional premises four-deep...
With each passing year, some advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment dream up increasingly far-fetched scenarios in which the long-expired ERA becomes part of the Constitution. For example, a new alert from Katrina's Dream piles delusional premises four-deep...
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. Equal Means Equal (EME) falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is a man intruding on their turf. (Both the Valame and EME lawsuits will fail, since there is no ERA.)
September 25, 2025 at 5:51 PM
Vikram Valame filed the first ERA-based challenge to the male-only draft registration law. Equal Means Equal (EME) falsely claims he argued for a weak standard of review under ERA. Their real issue is a man intruding on their turf. (Both the Valame and EME lawsuits will fail, since there is no ERA.)
FALSE CLAIMS ON E.R.A. CASES
When attorney Wendy Murphy with Equal Means Equal asserted on 9-16-25 that nobody else's current federal lawsuit "even mentions the Equal Rights Amendment," she knew better. She knew that Vikram Valame's challenge to the male-only draft law is based on the ERA.
A 🧵
When attorney Wendy Murphy with Equal Means Equal asserted on 9-16-25 that nobody else's current federal lawsuit "even mentions the Equal Rights Amendment," she knew better. She knew that Vikram Valame's challenge to the male-only draft law is based on the ERA.
A 🧵
September 23, 2025 at 8:30 PM
FALSE CLAIMS ON E.R.A. CASES
When attorney Wendy Murphy with Equal Means Equal asserted on 9-16-25 that nobody else's current federal lawsuit "even mentions the Equal Rights Amendment," she knew better. She knew that Vikram Valame's challenge to the male-only draft law is based on the ERA.
A 🧵
When attorney Wendy Murphy with Equal Means Equal asserted on 9-16-25 that nobody else's current federal lawsuit "even mentions the Equal Rights Amendment," she knew better. She knew that Vikram Valame's challenge to the male-only draft law is based on the ERA.
A 🧵
UPDATE ON THE TWO EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT SELECTIVE SERVICE CASES
Why did Wendy Murphy, attorney for Equal Means Equal, assert (in a Sept. 16 video message to group supporters) that only her case "even mentions" the ERA, and that it is "the only one asking the court to validate the ERA"? Beats us! 🧵
Why did Wendy Murphy, attorney for Equal Means Equal, assert (in a Sept. 16 video message to group supporters) that only her case "even mentions" the ERA, and that it is "the only one asking the court to validate the ERA"? Beats us! 🧵
September 22, 2025 at 2:00 PM
UPDATE ON THE TWO EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT SELECTIVE SERVICE CASES
Why did Wendy Murphy, attorney for Equal Means Equal, assert (in a Sept. 16 video message to group supporters) that only her case "even mentions" the ERA, and that it is "the only one asking the court to validate the ERA"? Beats us! 🧵
Why did Wendy Murphy, attorney for Equal Means Equal, assert (in a Sept. 16 video message to group supporters) that only her case "even mentions" the ERA, and that it is "the only one asking the court to validate the ERA"? Beats us! 🧵
National Archives press release:
"National Archives to Display Entire U.S. Constitution Including All 27 Amendments"
👍
www.archives.gov/press/press-...
"National Archives to Display Entire U.S. Constitution Including All 27 Amendments"
👍
www.archives.gov/press/press-...
National Archives to Display Entire U.S. Constitution Including All 27 Amendments for the First Time in U.S. History
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For the first time in history, the entire United States Constitution will go on display, to celebrate 250 years of American Freedom. The four-page Constitution and the original B...
www.archives.gov
September 9, 2025 at 8:46 PM
National Archives press release:
"National Archives to Display Entire U.S. Constitution Including All 27 Amendments"
👍
www.archives.gov/press/press-...
"National Archives to Display Entire U.S. Constitution Including All 27 Amendments"
👍
www.archives.gov/press/press-...
You're welcome, Grok.
August 28, 2025 at 11:48 AM
You're welcome, Grok.
"No one seems to know this" because it is a delusional claim. Lopez failed to note that since 2020, 18 federal judges have rejected lawsuits claiming that the ERA was ratified. 13 were appointed by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents. What happened to "respect for the rule of law"?
August 27, 2025 at 6:31 PM
"No one seems to know this" because it is a delusional claim. Lopez failed to note that since 2020, 18 federal judges have rejected lawsuits claiming that the ERA was ratified. 13 were appointed by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents. What happened to "respect for the rule of law"?
"Claim"? Better to respect the rule of law. Since "ERA ratification" by the Virginia legislature in January 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have REJECTED attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution. 13 were named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans.
August 27, 2025 at 12:08 PM
"Claim"? Better to respect the rule of law. Since "ERA ratification" by the Virginia legislature in January 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have REJECTED attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution. 13 were named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans.
We witness here a long-running exercise in political theater, with deeply delusional elements. Reality: Since "ERA ratification" by the Virginia legislature in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have REJECTED attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have ERA recognized as part of the Constitution.
#ERANow
#ERANow
August 27, 2025 at 10:27 AM
We witness here a long-running exercise in political theater, with deeply delusional elements. Reality: Since "ERA ratification" by the Virginia legislature in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have REJECTED attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have ERA recognized as part of the Constitution.
#ERANow
#ERANow
IN NEW REPLY ON EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT, JUSTICE DEPT CITES 9th CIRCUIT
1/4) In a new reply brief, the Justice Dept. led with the 9th Circuit's rejection as "meritless" a claim that the ERA is part of the Constitution. "...so uncontroversial [it was] handled...in a two-paragraph unpublished order."
1/4) In a new reply brief, the Justice Dept. led with the 9th Circuit's rejection as "meritless" a claim that the ERA is part of the Constitution. "...so uncontroversial [it was] handled...in a two-paragraph unpublished order."
August 21, 2025 at 4:10 PM
IN NEW REPLY ON EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT, JUSTICE DEPT CITES 9th CIRCUIT
1/4) In a new reply brief, the Justice Dept. led with the 9th Circuit's rejection as "meritless" a claim that the ERA is part of the Constitution. "...so uncontroversial [it was] handled...in a two-paragraph unpublished order."
1/4) In a new reply brief, the Justice Dept. led with the 9th Circuit's rejection as "meritless" a claim that the ERA is part of the Constitution. "...so uncontroversial [it was] handled...in a two-paragraph unpublished order."
Scott H. Greenfield: "If there was any doubt that it [the American Bar Association] couldn’t be trusted before, it’s now beyond question. The ABA has forsaken its legitimacy and should no longer have any role to play in law school accreditation."
blog.simplejustice.us/2025/08/20/a...
blog.simplejustice.us/2025/08/20/a...
August 20, 2025 at 1:50 PM
Scott H. Greenfield: "If there was any doubt that it [the American Bar Association] couldn’t be trusted before, it’s now beyond question. The ABA has forsaken its legitimacy and should no longer have any role to play in law school accreditation."
blog.simplejustice.us/2025/08/20/a...
blog.simplejustice.us/2025/08/20/a...
WEAKEST AMICUS BRIEF WE'VE EVER SEEN ON THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT
A 🧵
The National Women's Political Caucus joined about 50 little groups in filing perhaps the most feeble amicus brief we've ever seen in a case pertaining to the status of the Equal Rights Amendment.
@nwpc.bsky.social
A 🧵
The National Women's Political Caucus joined about 50 little groups in filing perhaps the most feeble amicus brief we've ever seen in a case pertaining to the status of the Equal Rights Amendment.
@nwpc.bsky.social
August 13, 2025 at 5:03 PM
WEAKEST AMICUS BRIEF WE'VE EVER SEEN ON THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT
A 🧵
The National Women's Political Caucus joined about 50 little groups in filing perhaps the most feeble amicus brief we've ever seen in a case pertaining to the status of the Equal Rights Amendment.
@nwpc.bsky.social
A 🧵
The National Women's Political Caucus joined about 50 little groups in filing perhaps the most feeble amicus brief we've ever seen in a case pertaining to the status of the Equal Rights Amendment.
@nwpc.bsky.social
Reminder that since Jan. 2020, 18 of 18 federal judges have rejected legal claims by pro-ERA litigants that the ERA is part of the Constitution (13 named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans). On July 17, 2025, a unanimous 9th Circuit panel held the "meritless" the claim the ERA was ratified.
August 4, 2025 at 8:33 PM
Reminder that since Jan. 2020, 18 of 18 federal judges have rejected legal claims by pro-ERA litigants that the ERA is part of the Constitution (13 named by Democratic presidents, 5 by Republicans). On July 17, 2025, a unanimous 9th Circuit panel held the "meritless" the claim the ERA was ratified.
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
Since VA "ratification" of the ERA in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution (13 were named by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents). Unanimous 9th Circuit panel held ERA claim "meritless."
July 29, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Since VA "ratification" of the ERA in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution (13 were named by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents). Unanimous 9th Circuit panel held ERA claim "meritless."
Since VA "ratification" of the ERA in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution (13 were named by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents). Unanimous 9th Circuit panel held ERA claim "meritless."
July 29, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Since VA "ratification" of the ERA in Jan. 2020, federal judges by 18-0 have rejected attempts by pro-ERA litigants to have the ERA recognized as part of the Constitution (13 were named by Democratic presidents and 5 by Republican presidents). Unanimous 9th Circuit panel held ERA claim "meritless."
Reposted by ERA_No_Shortcuts
"Meritless."
Although the unanimous negative ruling on the Equal Rights Amendment from the 9th Circuit panel comes as no surprise to anyone outside the ERA cult, for the true believers it seems to be a shock.
Although the unanimous negative ruling on the Equal Rights Amendment from the 9th Circuit panel comes as no surprise to anyone outside the ERA cult, for the true believers it seems to be a shock.
July 24, 2025 at 9:54 PM
"Meritless."
Although the unanimous negative ruling on the Equal Rights Amendment from the 9th Circuit panel comes as no surprise to anyone outside the ERA cult, for the true believers it seems to be a shock.
Although the unanimous negative ruling on the Equal Rights Amendment from the 9th Circuit panel comes as no surprise to anyone outside the ERA cult, for the true believers it seems to be a shock.