(WNY News Now) – Albany, NY – Senator George Borrello criticizes Democrats for disregarding constitutional process as a Livingston County judge invalidates ERA amendment, setting up an appeal from Attorney General Letitia James.
In a recent development, the Livingston County judge nullified the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) amendment due to procedural irregularities, sparking a contentious legal battle and political debate. Senator George Borrello, a vocal critic of the Democrat-led state government, condemned what he termed as a “disregard for constitutional norms” in the pursuit of political objectives.
Senator George Borrello stated, “The Democrats that control state government think the rules don’t apply to them, which is why we repeatedly see them cut legal and ethical corners in order to achieve their political aims.
I commend the Livingston County judge who has called out their arrogant disregard for the state constitution by striking down their ERA amendment because they failed to follow the mandated process.
While the Democrats will appeal, I urge the appellate judges who will make the next determination to be guided by the dictates of the state constitution and not politics. We all lose when the authority of our constitution is weakened, which is why I am optimistic this ruling will stand.”
The ruling, delivered by state Supreme Court Justice Daniel Doyle, a Republican, represents a victory for GOP factions contesting the ERA amendment. Doyle’s decision underscored allegations brought forth by Republicans, including State Assemblymember Marjorie Byrnes, asserting that the Democrat-dominated Legislature flouted procedural requisites during the approval process.
Central to the legal dispute is the contention that the Legislature failed to adhere to the prescribed protocol for voting on constitutional amendments. According to state law, lawmakers must obtain a formal opinion from the attorney general’s office before initiating the voting process. However, in this instance, the opinion was only procured after the initial vote, thereby casting doubt on the validity of the amendment.
Attorney General Letitia James, representing the state, expressed disappointment over the court’s ruling and announced plans to appeal the decision. James emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional integrity, particularly amidst ongoing challenges to fundamental rights and freedoms.
The ERA amendment, designed to fortify protections against discrimination in New York’s State Constitution, garnered attention for its comprehensive scope. In addition to bolstering existing safeguards against racial and religious discrimination, the proposed amendment sought to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on various factors, including ethnicity, age, disability, and gender-related characteristics.
Advocates hailed the ERA as a pivotal step towards advancing equality and justice, particularly for marginalized communities facing systemic injustices. The proposed amendment aimed to enshrine comprehensive protections, encompassing issues such as sexual orientation, gender identity, reproductive healthcare, and autonomy within the state’s foundational document.
Despite the setback resulting from the court’s ruling, proponents remain steadfast in their commitment to advocating for the ERA’s reinstatement. They argue that the amendment is indispensable in safeguarding the rights and dignity of all New Yorkers, especially those who have historically encountered discrimination and marginalization.
Leave a Reply