A New York judge has upended an effort to strengthen protections against discrimination in the state constitution, an action that will likely be appealed soon.
The measure in question is described as New York’s Equal Rights Amendment, as it updates the state’s constitution to expand anti-discrimination protections for groups of people who previously weren’t covered. Currently, the constitution bars discrimination against people based on race, color, creed and religion. The amendment would add other protections against discrimination, including discrimination based on a person’s ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, as well as reproductive health choices, including pregnancy and/or pregnancy outcomes (such as abortion).
Rochester-based state Supreme Court Justice Daniel J. Doyle ruled last week to block the amendment proposal, which was set to go before voters as a ballot measure in November. Doyle agreed with claims from a state Republican lawmaker that the measure was passed by the state legislature last summer in a manner that was improper and out of order, thereby negating its ability to move forward.
State constitutional amendments are supposed to be approved by the state attorney general’s office before the legislature can vote on them being included on the ballot. In July of 2023, the legislature voted on passing the measure, and Attorney General Letitia James (D) approved it days later instead.
The state argued in favor of allowing the measure to proceed anyway, noting that the legislature substantially complied with the way the amendment should be passed. In his ruling, Doyle expressed his disagreement.
“‘Substantial compliance’ is not compliance, and this court cannot condone actions taken by the Legislature in derogation of the expressed will of the people,” Doyle wrote in his opinion.
After his ruling was rendered, critics and supporters of the amendment noted that the process hasn’t always followed the standard that Doyle said should be strictly adhered by.
“More than a dozen constitutional amendments have proceeded in this exact manner in the last 50 years — and all made it on the ballot,” said Andrew Taverrite, communications director for New Yorkers for Equal Rights, a group that supports the measure.
Polling shows wide support in the state for passage of the amendment, with a survey published in March demonstrating that more than 7 in 10 New Yorkers (71 percent) would vote in favor of the measure.
Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul issued a statement disagreeing with Doyle’s ruling, noting that the measure would have enshrined abortion rights specifically within the state constitution.
At a time when Donald Trump and his anti-abortion allies in New York are trying to undermine our rights, we have the chance to show them what our state truly stands for. … Our decades-long fight to protect equality and reproductive freedom will not be thrown off track by one extremist judge and I look forward to casting my ballot for the Equal Rights Amendment in November.
AG James also promised to challenge the ruling in a higher court. Under state law, she can move to have the State Court of Appeals, the highest court in New York, hear the case right away, expediting the judicial review process to ensure that the measure can be put back on the ballot, if that’s what they eventually decide.
“This is a disappointing court decision, but we will appeal because New Yorkers deserve to be protected by their constitution, especially as our basic freedoms and rights are under attack,” James said in a statement reacting to the ruling.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.