Document Type


Publication Date



This Article examines the paradoxical world of Article V - the amending power of the Constitution - in light of the recent ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). It explores the question of whether Article V issues are justiciable, what role the federal and state courts play in determining Article V procedures, and who has the jurisdiction to evaluate the legal sufficiency of state ratifications. This is a confounding area of law, and with a few judicial precedents, some textualism and originalism arguments, and recourse to logic and scholarship, I conclude that the ERA is validly the Twenty-Eighth Amendment. I provide a detailed analysis of the congressional deadline and rescission issues that are currently before the courts and explore the unique role of the states in exercising their Article V powers to effect constitutional change.