top of page

Radical State ERA on November Ballot

Nevada Families for Freedom

State Affiliate of Eagle Forum, 46th Anniversary

186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105

July 9, 2022 In the Year of our Lord , 12:48pm

When you forward please delete bottom portion which says unsubscribe or someone will unsubscribe for you. Thank you for your acknowledgement of our work.

From the June Newsletter

Radical State ERA

Will be on the November ballot as Question #1

“Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended by adding a specific guarantee that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this State or any of its cities, counties, or other political subdivisions on account of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression, age, disability, ancestry, or national origin?”

A Victory Along the Way

On June 10, 2022 there was a hearing before the Legislative Commission to determine the final language of the explanation of Question 1. Before this hearing those who had testified during the Legislature in opposition or in favor of SJR8* the State ERA, were given an opportunity to read the first draft of the Legislative Counsel Bureau for the ballot question explanation and submit comments and suggestions.

Here is my testimony addressing the original Legislative Council Bureau’s draft.

SJR8 Ballot Language: The LCB’s (initial) Arguments Against passage of Ballot Question 1 are extremely weak and do not reflect the position of opponents or our concerns.

We do not just consider Question 1 to be “redundant and unnecessary” but harmful and dangerous especially to girls, women and parents.

Dangerous consequences of the language in the amendment include “sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and age” could, allow minor children to receive puberty blockers and surgery for gender change without parental consent.

One of the most dangerous assertions by the LCB gives the appearance that religious liberty will be protected under the state ERA. This is erroneous. I specifically asked the sponsor to add religious liberty to her list of rights supposedly protected by the proposed Nevada ERA. She refused and religious liberty was specifically left out of the proposed amendment creating Legislative intent. As a result of the last couple of years under covid we can see that government can eliminate religious liberty at their whim. None of the protections cited in the LCB’s (original) explanation protected religious liberty during the pandemic.

Because the proposed amendment DOES NOT protect religious liberty, It could force professionals who object to performing abortions and prescribing puberty blockers and gender change surgery for children to perform such or give up their professions. It will result in discrimination of individuals and organizations with traditional views on marriage and gender, and result in funding cuts to social service organizations. Even privately funded religious schools and organizations will be at risk.

As under the State ERA in New Mexico this amendment will result in TAX Funded abortions.

It will result in allowing biological males to compete against girls in sports and on sports teams and for scholarships, harming girls and women. Continued

Nevada Families for Freedom Newsletter is published 12 times a year. The Subscription price is $25

It will require government owned facilities, like schools and colleges, to allow biological men in women’s bathrooms, showers and locker rooms endangering girls and women.

The LCB’s argument that asserts that the federal ERA is pending is absolutely false and needs to be removed. “Upon guidance from the Trump Administration’s Office of Legal Counsel in 2020, national archivist, David Ferriero, declined to add ERA as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. Proponents sued Ferriero. In March 2021, Obama-appointed Washington, D.C. Circuit Court Judge Rudolph Contreras confirmed that the 1972-passed Equal Rights Amendment was dead, could not be revived, and that ERA could not be added to the Constitution. On January 6, 2022, the Biden Administration Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion leaving in place the guidance from the Trump Administration, providing bi-partisan confirmation that (federal) ERA is dead.”

Could age-based laws on sex, sexual consent, and child endangerment be challenged?

In counties where prostitution is legal and regulated by the state, will current age requirements be upheld?

No substantive Legislative hearings were held on the impacts of this vague language. It is truly impossible to know the far reaching consequences.

It will hurt women, girls and parents and is dangerous so Vote No on Question 1. END

We Were Worried

We did not know and were worried about what the Legislative Counsel Bureau’s attorneys would do with the arguments the seven people who had originally testified against SJR8* the State ERA submitted. Would they include any of legitimate arguments against the State ERA.

However, when the Legislative Commission met we learned that the LCB had a new draft of for the ballot explanation. We were very pleased to see that most of our arguments and concerns were included in the language. It was A MIRACLE!

The Legislative Commission is made up of six Democrats and six Republicans. However, in reviewing the members all of the Republican Senators including James Settelmeyer, Joe Hardy, and Scott Hammond had voted in favor of SJR8*. Only Senators Carrie Buck, Pete Goicoechea, and Ira Hansen voted NO during the 2021 Legislature. The funniest thing was Settelmeyer, Hardy and Hammond acted surprised during the hearing when they heard the arguments against the SJR8* as if they had no idea that’s what it would really mean. LOL! They had all been informed by us before their vote what it would mean. What were they thinking!!!! Votes? Campaign advisors? They really were astonished that the LCB accepted our arguments as legitimate because they had voted for SJR8* but really didn’t favor those radical results.

The Assembly Republicans on the Legislative Commission were Jill Dickman (voted against SJR8* during the 2021 Session) who did a marvelous job bringing forth our arguments and advocating for fairness in the language. Jill Tolles (voted for SJR8* during the 2021 Session) was a troll and did everything she could to weaken and undermine our arguments. Tom Roberts who also voted for SJR8* during the session did not make any comments.

As a result of Jill Tolles efforts to weaken the language against passage of the State ERA a few changes were made to the second draft of the LCB. However, Jill Dickman also weakened the pro-ERA language in a bid for fairness. Jill succeeded in putting in language that I believe will hurt the proponents in her effort to help them. LOL!

In the end we were very pleased with the final language which the Legislative Commission adopted. As of June 27th that final language is not available to the public. All in all another MIRACLE!

We depend on your free will gifts.

Sign up for our Emails:

Please make checks payable to Nevada Families, not tax deductible,

186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, NV 89801


Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page