Minnesota lawmakers on Monday began debate on a sweeping bill to amend the constitution to protect abortion and LGBTQ rights.
If approved by lawmakers this session and then by voters on the 2026 ballot, the Minnesota Equal Rights Amendment would provide one of the most expansive protections for abortion and LGBTQ rights in the nation.
Minnesota lawmakers begin deliberating physician-assisted suicide bill
More than 100 people packed the legislative hearing Monday. Supporters wore green clothing and buttons that read “ERA YES,” while opponents wore bright red shirts that read “No constitutional amendment to kill unborn children.”
Betty Folliard, whose group ERA Minnesota has been pushing for such measures since 2014, as well as members of gender equality advocacy group Gender Justice and LGBTQ+ advocacy group Outfront Minnesota expressed support.
A green sign that reads “YES to ERA!” held by supporters of the Minnesota Equal Rights Amendment at the Minnesota State Capitol on February 12, 2024 in St. Paul, Minnesota. The proposal would provide the most extensive protections for abortion rights and LGBTQ rights in the United States. It will be approved by lawmakers this Congress and then by Minnesota voters on the 2026 ballot. (AP Photo/Trisha Ahmed)
“This is not just a reproductive justice issue,” Folliard said in an interview. “It’s also about wage inequality, historical stereotypes and discrimination that have been ignored from generation to generation.”
The text of the proposed amendment would prohibit states from discriminating against people on the basis of race, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, or sex (including gender identity, expression, or sexual orientation). It is. States also could not discriminate against a person who “makes and carries out decisions regarding all matters relating to her own pregnancy or the decision to become or remain pregnant.”
Minnesota already has a Human Rights Act, an anti-discrimination law that applies to individuals, businesses, schools and other institutions. The proposed constitutional amendment would apply to state government, allowing certain laws to be repealed by future lawmakers or administrations, including recent legislation making Minnesota a haven for out-of-state people seeking abortions and gender-affirming care. This will prevent the
Karena Falls testified to the contrary. She is a college student in the Twin Cities and said she is “repulsed” by the proposal to “put radical abortion policies into the Constitution.”
Testimony against the proposal included members of the Minnesota Family Council, a Christian advocacy group. Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, an anti-abortion group. the Minnesota Catholic Conference, the policy organization of the Catholic Church;
Rebecca Delahunt, director of public policy for the Minnesota Family Council, said she is concerned that the ERA will give children a constitutional right to gender-sensitive care.
Republican House Minority Leader Lisa Demuth said it was “very disappointing” that Democrats developed the proposal without Republican input. Her motion to submit the proposal for questioning in another House committee failed along party lines.
A motion by Democratic House Majority Leader Jamie Long to bring the proposal to the House floor was successful on a 9-5 vote along party lines.
“These rights are very important,” Long said. “We know Congress can change, we know courts can change, but the Constitution is the only thing we know that will remain in effect. .”
If approved by Congress, voters in 2026 will state that “all persons are guaranteed equal rights under the laws of this state, regardless of race, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, or sex (pregnancy, , including sexual orientation)?”
If approved, the amendments will come into effect on January 1, 2027.
Last year, another Minnesota ERA proposal passed the Senate, but did not receive a final vote in the House.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Democratic Rep. Kaoli Van Hel, lead author of both proposals, said some Democratic lawmakers want the ERA to do more to protect transgender and reproductive rights. She said recent attacks on transgender people and the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade are top concerns for many Democrats.
Democrats have a slim majority in the Senate, with the difference being just one vote in the Senate, so Republicans would need support from a majority of their own party to oppose the bill. If a constitutional amendment is put on the ballot, it must be approved by a majority of all voters who cast a ballot, not just a majority of those who voted on the issue.
