A dangerous and unconstitutional ballot initiative is one step closer to appearing on New York ballots in November as Proposition 1. The so-called Equal Rights Amendment demands that all New Yorkers be treated according to their “gender identity” and “gender expression.”

This would cement a basis for activists to demand transgender individuals’ access to women’s private spaces and the social transition of children in schools without parental involvement or even notification. 

If that weren’t bad enough, the anti-woman ERA is not constitutionally allowed to appear on the ballot, but is being ushered through anyway thanks to partisan courts. 

Here’s the problem. In true Democrat trifecta form, the Legislature circumvented New York’s constitutionally required process for adopting ballot language. 

The required process is simple: any proposed ballot language must be referred to the attorney general for an opinion, and the legislature cannot act on the language until the attorney general’s opinion is received or 20 days has passed.

Here, the proposed language went to a vote the same day it was forwarded to the attorney general, in clear violation of the law. The trial court had no trouble finding this was illegal. Then something odd happened.

A New York appellate court, knowing this ruling was correct, voided the ruling anyway, saying that the challenge should have been brought earlier. Yet constitutional challenges to legislative action can be brought at any time. 

New York’s highest court refused to hear an initial “as of right” appeal, saying “no substantial constitutional question is directly involved.” What? This case centers around an unconstitutional process. 

We’re not done fighting. The Independent Women’s Forum is making a final request to New York’s highest court to hear the appeal because this is madness. 

It’s no surprise to us that the New York legislature broke constitutional requirements in rushing the language on the ballot, but it’s alarming that New York appellate courts won’t enforce basic constitutional requirements. 

The consequences, if the ballot initiative passes, are devastating. This disastrous proposed amendment to the New York constitution has far reaching implications for women, children, and parents, and once it becomes enshrined in the state’s constitution, we’re stuck. 

Here’s what it does. The state’s constitution currently bans discrimination based on race, color, creed, or religion. Democratic legislators proposed a constitutional amendment expanding protections to include, among other things, gender identity, gender expression, and age. 

Democrats, with their supermajority, plainly needed to force this measure on the people of New York because they know how unpopular it is on second glance. Enshrining gender ideology in the state constitution means individuals who “identify” as women must be treated as women, including in domestic abuse shelters, children’s locker rooms, sororities, sports, and prison.

Laws on the books protecting women and girls would be erased as the state shifts its focus on prioritizing the feelings of men over the safety of women. Some implications are simply perplexing and untested, like how to provide equal resources to individuals with “nonbinary” identities like “Maverique.” 

While the vague and subjective gender identity category would work against women and girls, the proposed “age” protection would work against parents in favor of the government. By giving children “gender identity” based rights, the government can step in against parents choosing to raise their children according to his or her sex. 

All this sounds like a bad idea, so prepare yourselves to be lied to. Democrats are falsely waving this around as necessary protection for abortion — as if that were at any risk in New York, which has long codified abortion. They hope this invented threat will drive turnout in November, given the hard-to-identify positive vision from the party. 

Don’t buy it. Enshrining gender ideology in the state constitution will devastate women, children, and families, and isn’t popular with New Yorkers. 

The Independent Women’s Forum is asking that this proposed amendment go through the considered process before being thrust onto the ballot and shrouded in lies. The courts may want to look aside, but we aren’t finished demanding they tell us why such a bad idea should be exempt from the law.