The Ruth Wynn Woodward Chair (1986-1995 Summary).

Summary of Ruth Wynn Woodward Chair. Origin, professorship to date, community contributions to date and post-doctoral fellowship included

RWWP Liaision Committee Summary.

Summary of RWWP liaison committee, source is 1999 WS Newsletter

Identity and Liberation

“Suppose I start by stating that I am a straight white cis man from a working-class family. What does that even mean? How does it affect my actions, my values, and my decision to give this talk? Is this talk problematic? Do we need another white guy dispensing advice on race, gender, class, and more? I’m going to share some stories, some revelations, and some quotes that have helped me along. Most of these are stories of failures, don’t expect to be inspired. However, I do think I can offer at least my own perspective on working to wake up and working to support change. I’ll make sure there’s plenty of time for a Q&A, bring your questions and I’ll bring mine.” — Kevin Roberg

Columbia Law School’s ERA Project Releases New Policy Paper Demonstrating Race-Based Gap in Who Benefits From Sex Discrimination Laws

New York, New York – On February 27, 2023, Columbia Law School’s Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) Project released a new policy paper showing that despite sweeping federal, state, and local laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in virtually all significant aspects of the U.S. economy and society, white women have been the primary beneficiaries of sex equality laws, leaving women of color significantly behind

Ting Ting Cheng Appointed as Director of Columbia Law School’s ERA Project

New York, New York — Today, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) Project at Columbia Law School announced that Ting Ting Cheng has been appointed as the Project’s first Director. Ms. Cheng has wide-ranging experience as an advocate for gender justice and brings an ambitious strategic vision to the ERA Project’s work

FAQ on the U.S. Archivist and the Future of the Equal Rights Amendment

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022, the Senate will hold hearings on the nomination of Colleen Shogan as the new Archivist of the United States. This FAQ offers a short primer on what the Archivist does, her official role in the finalization of proposed amendments to the U.S. Constitution, including the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), and the impact of Archivist action on the validity of the ERA

ERA Project Summary of Argument Before PA Supreme Court on Whether Medicaid Abortion Ban Amounts to Sex Discrimination

This morning, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, a case in which reproductive rights advocates have challenged the state’s ban on Medicaid funding for abortion (Coverage Ban), arguing that the ban violates the state constitution’s explicit prohibitions against sex discrimination

Women\u27s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Graduation Celebration

Invitation to the 2017 graduation celebration for students of Women\u27s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies

Statement from Columbia Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality Law on the Supreme Court Decision Overruling the Constitutional Right to Abortion

The Supreme Court opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization signals a major break with at least three generations of constitutional law. This opinion eliminates not only constitutional protections for abortion, but well-settled legal principles on which fundamental rights have rested for over 60 years. “Within a 24-hour period the Supreme Court ruled on the one hand that abortion rights are a local issue to be decided by each state independently, while on the other, states are barred from making local decisions about how to regulate guns,” said Katherine Franke, James L. Dohr Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality Law. “Both cases involve the meaning of freedom, morality, and safety

ERA Project FAQ on the District Court\u27s Decision in Virginia v. Ferriero

The states that brought the lawsuit do not have standing. This means that the states that brought the lawsuit were not injured by the fact that the Archivist refused to publish the amendment. Their argument is that the Archivist’s refusal to publish the Amendment undermined their sovereign power to ratify a change to the Constitution