Supreme Court Hinders Gender Violence Laws: ERA Urgently Needed

In an alarming trend, the Supreme Court appears to be undermining gender violence laws, continuing its assault on women’s rights. Last term, in Counterman v. Colorado, the Court overturned a stalking conviction, citing First Amendment concerns, despite clear threats made by the offender.

This term, in United States v. Rahimi, the Court could further weaken protections against domestic violence by potentially siding with the argument that individuals subject to domestic violence protective orders should retain their Second Amendment rights. This stance ignores the severe risks associated with guns in abusive households.

This disturbing pattern extends back years, as seen in United States v. Morrison, where the Court invalidated a federal civil remedy against sexual harassers and assaulters. Castle Rock v. Gonzales also allowed police discretion in domestic violence cases.

The California Legislative Women’s Caucus has filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold civil restraining orders that effectively protect women from gun violence.

The only viable solution to counter these worrying developments is a renewed push for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Representatives Ayanna Pressley and Ben Cardin have taken steps to affirm the ERA’s ratification, bringing this vital issue back into focus.

As gender violence laws hang in the balance, the urgency of ratifying the ERA has never been clearer.

Re-reported from the article originally published in The msmagazine