Describe the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Why were some opposed to the ERA? Compare and contrast the ERA and the Nineteenth Amendment. How has the ERA impacted civil rights in the United States?
What will be an ideal response?
Answer: An ideal response will:
1. Describe the Equal Rights Amendment as a proposal that would have enshrined gender equality in the Constitution.
2. Explain the concerns of the ERA's opponents, such as the fear that it could disrupt the traditional family relationship and put women on the front lines in the armed forces.
3. Compare the ERA and the Nineteenth Amendment, noting that both expand civil rights for women.
4. Contrast the ERA with the Nineteenth Amendment, noting that the Nineteenth Amendment addresses only the right to vote, while the ERA addresses a much broader array of civil rights.
5. Evaluate how the ERA has impacted civil rights in the United States. The most common assessment will be that the ERA has had little effect on civil rights in the United States because it never became law. Others, however, could argue that the ERA has impacted civil rights by keeping women's rights on the front burner, despite the fact that it never became law.
You might also like to view...
The true leader of the House of Representatives is the __________, elected by the majority party
a. majority leader b. majority whip c. president pro tempore d. speaker
Long-cycle theory focuses on the rise and fall of the leading global powers in the modern world system
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
The single largest factor driving deforestation is ______.
a. pollution b. subsistence farming c. logging d. harvesting wood for fuel
What are the strict scrutiny standard and the rational basis standard? What sort of classification system would cause the Supreme Court to apply each standard to determine if a discriminatory law is constitutionally permissible?
Under what circumstances would it apply a quasi-suspect or heightened standard? Give an example of a law that would be subject to each standard of review. Do you agree with this three-tiered approach? Why or why not?