Republican Attorneys General Steve Marshall (Alabama), Jeff Landry (Louisiana), and Jason Ravnsborg (South Dakota) are tireless defenders of the rule of law and the Constitution. Last month, the three AGs formed a multistate coalition that filed a legal challenge to stop radical activists from illegally rewriting the United States Constitution. At issue is liberal activists’ attempt to resurrect the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), even though the deadline for adding this Amendment to the Constitution expired 40 YEARS AGO! When the ERA was sent to the States in 1972, it was understood by Congress and the States that there was a seven-year ratification deadline.
This week, the United States Department of Justice issued an opinion explaining why these three Republican champions are correct in their legal position and that indeed, the process being concocted by liberals is unconstitutional.
Despite there being no legal precedent or Constitutional basis for this effort, Democrat attorneys general and the Democrat Attorneys General Association (DAGA) have been trumpeting the merits of the illegal scheme even over opposition from Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who recently stated, “if the ERA is to be added to the Constitution, it will need to ‘be put back in the political hopper, starting over again, collecting the necessary number of States to ratify it.’
While Democratic Attorneys General choose legal arguments based on political expediency, Republican Attorneys General tirelessly defend the Constitution and the rule of law.
RAGA Chairman and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry issued the following statement.
“Democratic Attorneys General are sadly competing with their party’s presidential primary field to see who can be the most extreme. My colleagues and I will continue to defend the constitution against illicit hijacking by liberal state legislatures. To illustrate DAGA’s extremism and willingness to put political convenience over the rule of law, even the gold standard of liberal legal elites, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, disagrees with their position.
“Anybody who wants to amend our nation’s most important foundational document needs to follow the established rules and procedures, not take shortcuts and then bully and bulldoze until they get their way.”