The Nevada Senate will soon consider a bill that would overturn Nevada’s ban on female genital mutilation, and Senate Democrats are tripping over themselves to vote for it. Why would anyone support ending a ban on something Nevada law defines as sexual abuse?
Review Journal (h/t RF) Female genital mutilation, practiced in much of the Muslim world, also called female circumcision, is currently a felony in Nevada. It involves “removing or infibulating the clitoris, vulva, labia major or labia minor for nonmedical purposes.” If the ban is overturned, female circumcision wouldn’t merely be legal — it’d be a right protected by the U.S. Constitution.
That’d be atrocious, but the ERA doesn’t make exceptions for preventing sexual abuse.
Congress passed the ERA in 1972 as a constitutional amendment, needing the approval of 38 state legislatures within seven years. Even after Congress bypassed constitutional procedure to extend the deadline by three years, only 35 states approved it. Nevada wasn’t one of them.
The amendment is short, and the key part says, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
MORE ON FGM HERE