With the news that the Court of Appeals has rejected Thursday the challenge to Proposition One, a proposed so-called “equal rights” amendment to the constitution of the State of New York, we commend Ed Cox’s blunt comments of the decision. The chairman of the state Republican Party calls the proposed amendment — touted as a progressive measure to combat discrimination — “a radical departure from common sense.” He’s worth reading.

The state’s high court, in overturning a May ruling to strike the proposed Equal Rights Amendment from the ballot, now places the responsibility for the adoption of the measure on Empire State voters to decide come November. Mr. Cox cites his confidence that New Yorkers, “if they’re told the truth” will “resoundingly reject” the proposal that, despite the amendment’s claims, would do little in the way of enhancing their liberties.

The proposal was knocked off the ballot when Supreme Court justice, Daniel Doyle, sided with Assemblywoman Marjorie Byrnes, who argued that the Democrats made a procedural misstep when hastily approving the amendment in July 2022. In his decision, Judge Doyle noted that “the constitution is the supreme will of the people. Its amendment should be undertaken by strict adherence to the will of the people.”

Governor Hochul railed against the ruling, pledging not to let the proposal “be thrown off track by one extremist judge.” Judge Doyle’s decision was later overturned in June by a panel of mid-level appellate judges who cited that the GOP had missed the four-month deadline for bringing their legal challenge. The court ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals on Thursday when it effectively declined to take up the appeal raised by the plaintiffs.

The amendment — which would extend the language of the state’s current discrimination ban to include vague terms like  “gender identity” and “gender expression” — leaves room to allow men and boys to compete in women and girls’ sports, Mr. Cox and other critics say. That raises concerns that have emerged across the country about transgender athletes tilting the playing field in athletic contests. 

The amendment could nullify decades of advances giving women equal opportunities in athletic competition. It could also, critics assert, allow minors access to puberty blockers and transgender surgeries without parental consent. The proposed amendment could allow teachers to help a young girl “try life as a boy” without parental knowledge, New York-based Coalition to Protect Kids, a ballot committee formed in opposition to the measure, claims. 

Further, the amendment would insert “ethnicity” and “national origin” in the list of protections, which, Mr. Cox warns, makes the amendment “a Trojan Horse” that could provide illegal immigrants with access to benefits paid for by Empire State taxpayers. It also could pave the way for non-citizen voting, as it “erases the lines between a citizen and someone who’s here illegally,” says civil rights lawyer Bobbie Anne Cox. 

In their zeal to impose questionable social engineering on an unsuspecting public, the Democrats have tried to pin the issue to their single issue winner — abortion rights. That, though, is already protected by state law. “This is not an amendment that is all about abortion. If they wanted an amendment that’s all about abortion, they should have written one,” Representative Lee Zeldin, the GOP’s gubernatorial candidate in 2023, argues. 

Any one or all of these issues would be enough to vote against the amendment. It’s not that we oppose equal rights. The Sun has been campaigning for them for generations. It’s that matters on gender and other recent issues are too much in flux to be addressed by constitutional amendments. That might come in due time. As currently written, though, it’s no wonder that the Republicans — and no doubt some Democrats — are throwing down a flag.