Minnesota lawmakers began their deliberations on Monday over comprehensive legislation aimed at amending the constitution to safeguard abortion and LGBTQ rights.
The approval of the Minnesota Equal Rights Amendment by lawmakers this session, followed by the support of voters on the 2026 ballot, would make it one of the most comprehensive safeguards for abortion and LGBTQ rights in the country.
More than 100 individuals packed the legislative hearing room on Monday. Supporters adorned themselves in green attire and donned buttons displaying the phrase “ERA YES,” while opponents sported vibrant red shirts emblazoned with the words “NO CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to kill unborn babies.”
Betty Folliard, the leader of ERA Minnesota, has been advocating for this measure since 2014. During the testimony, she expressed her support for the cause. Additionally, representatives from Gender Justice, an organization dedicated to promoting gender equity, and OutFront Minnesota, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, also testified in favor of the proposed measure.
In an interview, Folliard emphasized that this issue goes beyond reproductive justice. It also encompasses pay inequity, ingrained stereotypes, and ongoing discrimination that persist from one generation to the next.
The proposed amendment aims to prevent the state from engaging in any form of discrimination based on race, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, or sex, including gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation. Additionally, the state would be prohibited from discriminating against individuals based on their ability to make and carry out decisions concerning their own pregnancy or whether to conceive or maintain a pregnancy.
Minnesota currently has a non-discrimination law known as the Human Rights Act. This law extends its reach to individuals, businesses, schools, and other institutions. However, a proposed constitutional amendment aims to specifically protect state government. The amendment seeks to safeguard certain laws, including those that have made Minnesota a safe haven for individuals seeking abortion and gender-affirming care, preventing them from being repealed by future lawmakers and administrations.
Carrena Falls, a college student from the Twin Cities, expressed her strong opposition to the proposal. She described it as repulsive, stating that it would essentially solidify a radical abortion agenda within our Constitution.
Testifying against the proposal were various individuals and organizations, including members of Minnesota Family Council, a Christian advocacy group; Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, an anti-abortion group; and Minnesota Catholic Conference, a policy organization representing the Catholic Church.
According to Rebecca Delahunt, the director of public policy at Minnesota Family Council, there is a concern regarding the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) granting children a constitutional right to gender-affirming care.
Republican House Minority Leader, Lisa Demuth, expressed her deep disappointment at the Democrats’ decision to develop the proposal without any input from the Republicans. Despite her efforts to submit the proposal for questioning in other House committees, her motion failed to gain the support of the party lines.
In a party-line vote, Democrat House Majority Leader Jamie Long successfully pushed forward the proposal to the House floor with a 9-5 vote.
“These rights hold immense significance,” Long emphasized. “Legislatures and courts may alter over time, but the Constitution remains a steadfast force that will continue to shape our society.”
If the Legislature approves, voters in 2026 will be asked the following question: “Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to ensure that all individuals are guaranteed equal rights under the laws of this state, and to prohibit discrimination based on race, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, or sex, including pregnancy, gender, and sexual orientation?”
The amendment, if given the green light, will come into effect on January 1, 2027.
In the previous year, the Senate successfully passed a Minnesota ERA proposal, but it failed to secure a final vote in the House.
Democratic Representative Kaohly Vang Her, who played a key role in drafting both proposals, expressed that there was a desire among several Democrats to enhance the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in order to provide greater protection for transgender and reproductive rights. She highlighted the recent surge in attacks against transgender individuals and the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade as significant concerns for many Democrats.
In order for Democrats to pass legislation despite opposition from Republicans, they rely on the support of most members within their own party. This is particularly crucial due to their slim majority in the Senate, where they hold just one vote. However, if a constitutional amendment were to be included on the ballot, it would require the approval of a majority of all voters who cast their ballots, rather than just a majority of those who vote on the specific question.
