We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

This week opened with Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York arguing in the New York Times that President Biden “direct the national archivist to certify and publish the Equal Rights Amendment. This would mean that the amendment has been officially ratified and that the archivist has declared it part of the Constitution.” Forty-five other Democratic senators and 100 House members have endorsed this proposed executive diktat.

This is a back-door attempt to legalize abortion without restriction, and Gillibrand adds that it would “strike down state prohibitions on Medicaid-funded abortion care.” The time limit that Congress attached to the ERA back in the 1970s that has long since expired? Never mind, says Gillibrand, “the deadline was meaningless.” (Virginia finally ratified the ERA in 2020—40 years after the deadline for ratification, but also ignoring three states that rescinded their ratification back in the 1970s, leaving the ERA still three states short of a bona fide 3/4ths majority of the states.)

Yesterday the National Archivist and her chief deputy slammed the door on this attempted constitutional insurrection with a strong statement:

“As Archivist and Deputy Archivist of the United States, it is our responsibility to uphold the integrity of the constitutional amendment process and ensure that changes to the Constitution are carried out in accordance with the law. At this time, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) cannot be certified as part of the Constitution due to established legal, judicial, and procedural decisions.

“In 2020 and again in 2022, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice affirmed that the ratification deadline established by Congress for the ERA is valid and enforceable. The OLC concluded that extending or removing the deadline requires new action by Congress or the courts. Court decisions at both the District and Circuit levels have affirmed that the ratification deadlines established by Congress for the ERA are valid. Therefore, the Archivist of the United States cannot legally publish the Equal Rights Amendment. As the leaders of the National Archives, we will abide by these legal precedents and support the constitutional framework in which we operate.”

File this away under the heading that what the progressive hearts wants the progressive heart will get—by any means necessary. Never mind the law or the Constitution. But never forget that it is Trump who is said to be transgressing “norms.”

Speaking of norms, we are once again presented with the spectacle of Congress struggling at the last minute to pass another whopping spending bill in the form of a “continuing resolution” (CR) to avoid a “government shutdown.” It means that Congress has once again failed to meet the legally-specified terms of the budget process, for something like the 45th time in the last 50 years.

First, let’s once again debunk the “government shutdown” theme, beloved of media hacks everywhere. Question: when the government “shuts down,” do your local public schools still operate? Do your state and local police still patrol? Does your county government still function? Are Gavin Newsom and Tim Walz still (unfortunately) on the job? There are thousands of governmental units in the United States, and only one of them “shuts down” when there is a budget impasse. How likely is the EPA going dark going to affect your day-to-day life? And to be sure, not even the federal government completely “shuts down” when there is a budget impasse: Social Security checks still go out; the military still is on watch, etc. It is something of a sham.

But second, beyond the theater of a government shutdown, continuing resolutions are a farce and dereliction of duty on the part of Congress, and especially House Republicans. How many times have we seen this movie, which resembles every horror movie where the kids split up inside the haunted building? There are always some diehards Republicans who refuse on principle to support a bloated CR, after which they either cave after a week, or the Republican leadership depends on Democratic votes to pass the CR, which means Democrats and their client groups win everything they want in the CR.

Instead of standing on principle, how about House Republicans decide to target just five items in the CR to be removed, say funding for Planned Parenthood, State Department grants to NGOs, funding for NPR and PBS, and so forth. These wouldn’t amount to much money, but it’s a start. Then come back for more on the next budget cycle and CR. And the one after that. Why does no one seem to have the wit to attempt this?