Recently, a state appeals court in New York overturned a previous ruling and reinstated a proposed amendment aimed at barring discrimination based on gender identity and pregnancy outcomes. The amendment was initially struck down by an upstate judge in May due to procedural errors by state lawmakers.
The appellate division judges cited a new legal issue in their decision to overturn the earlier ruling. They determined that the individuals who had filed the lawsuit against the amendment missed the deadline to challenge it, thus barring them from seeking legal relief under a four-month statute of limitations.
New York Attorney General Letitia James expressed her satisfaction with the decision, calling it a significant victory for protecting access to abortion and preventing discrimination against vulnerable communities.
The proposed Equal Rights Amendment seeks to expand the state constitution’s protections beyond race, color, creed, and religion to include categories such as ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive health care and autonomy.
While the amendment does not explicitly address the right to abortion, supporters argue that it would prevent discrimination against individuals based on their reproductive choices, including abortion. However, opponents, such as Republican state Assemblywoman Marjorie Byrnes, who initiated the lawsuit, have raised concerns.
They fear the broad language of the amendment could lead to unintended consequences, such as mandating sports leagues to allow transgender athletes on female teams or impacting parental rights in decisions concerning transgender health care.
Supporters of the amendment have clarified that it is not intended to interfere with parental involvement in medical decisions regarding minors. Ultimately, the fate of the amendment now rests with the voters, who will decide its approval in the upcoming 2024 election.
ALSO READ: “New York’s Top Court Rejects Trump’s Gag Order Appeal in Hush Money Case”
The controversy surrounding this amendment has also sparked political implications, with Democrats hoping that its inclusion on the ballot will drive voter turnout. Justice Daniel Doyle’s initial ruling against the amendment centered on procedural grounds, arguing that lawmakers had approved its language without obtaining a necessary legal opinion from the attorney general beforehand.
As the debate continues, the restoration of the Equal Rights Amendment to the ballot sets the stage for a crucial decision by New York voters, potentially reshaping the state’s constitutional protections and societal norms regarding discrimination and reproductive rights.
Comments