Protestors at a Teachers for Choice rally in Times Square hold up vote no on Prop 1 posters. (Credit: Dana Binfet)
On a Thursday afternoon in early October, activists with Teachers for Choice, an organization that draws its membership from the teachers union, gathered in the tourist-flooded streets of Times Square. Beneath flashing billboards, the group urged New Yorkers to vote “no” on Proposal 1, the Equal Rights Amendment on the ballot this Election Day.
“Hands off the children,” chanted one activist, Kevin Nathaniel, banging bongo drums in a call and response song heard through the din of honking cars and blazing sirens.
Children? The Equal Rights Amendment/Proposal 1, to some people, is mostly about safeguarding a woman’s right to choose an abortion by enshrining that right in the state constitution, above the legislative back and forth. It gets there under the existing constitutional protections against sex discrimination, by adding pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes to the list of who is protected.
But Proposal 1 has ignited contentious debate across New York State in part because of other categories it would add to the protected list—age, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.
LGBTQ+ activists and organizations argue that Prop 1 will add important protections at the state level for vulnerable members of their community, including non-binary and transgender individuals. Opposition groups, meanwhile, say that the proposal would allow minors to seek medical procedures without parental consent due to the ballot measure’s inclusion of age. Michael Kane, founder of Teachers for Choice, which organized the rally in Times Square in coordination with the Coalition to Protect Kids, argues that gender affirming care should be decided by adults.
Months before Election Day, billboards funded by a group called The Coalition to Protect Kids— bearing slogans like “vote NO to erasing women, vote NO to Prop 1 Nov. 5th”— cropped up across the state in opposition to Prop 1. The activist organization contends that if passed, the state could have more authority than parents in medical decision-making by young people.
Another big part of the group’s messaging is that, under Proposal 1, they argue, transgender athletes could be allowed to compete in school sports without restrictions.
“I have two daughters and for them to be in a locker room, getting dressed with a biological male, it’s degrading,” said Michele Sterlace-Accorsi, the executive director of Feminists Choosing Life of New York (FCLNY). “It’s unfair, it’s degrading, and it’s really dehumanizing to biological women to open up that Pandora’s box,” Sterlace-Accorsi said. ”I want to protect my children. I don’t want them in a locker room with a biological male and I don’t want them to compete against a biological male.”
Would Proposal 1 do these things? Katharine Franke is a Columbia University law professor and founder of the ERA Project, a law and policy think tank that aims to advance the equal rights amendment at the federal and state levels with an overarching cause of gender justice. At a Sept. 25 virtual public forum held by Manhattan Community Board 8, Franke discussed Proposal 1 with community board members. When asked if the ballot measure impacts parental involvement with gender-affirming care for minors, Franke argued that the discourse surrounding this aspect of the bill has been unfounded.
“Although it talks about gender identity and gender expression, Prop 1 does not undermine parental authority or power with their children in any way,” Franke said. “Whatever the existing state law is that deals with medical procedures for a child or for a minor, the requirement of parental consent would remain in place; this doesn’t obviate that in any way.”
As for transgender students in sports, the Equal Rights Amendment would guarantee such participation, though it is already protected in NY State Law. Over the last ten years the participation of transgender athletes in school sports across the state has been protected by New York State Legislation. According to Education Law, Section 3201, despite any conflicting general, special, or local regulations from the education department “no person shall be disqualified from state public and high school athletic teams, by reason of that person’s sex, except pursuant to regulations promulgated by the state commissioner of education.”
Teachers for Choice doesn’t hold an organizational position on abortion but adamantly opposes forced medical procedures and mandates. The group fought against mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations in 2020 and has referred to Prop 1 as a Trojan Horse that conceals far-reaching impacts of the ballot measure through vague language.
“We’ve beaten quite a few bills in Albany that would allow children to get medical procedures without parental knowledge or consent,” Kane said. “But if this goes on to the Constitution the way this is worded, it appears there won’t even need to be a bill, it’ll be a constitutional right for a child to access medical service that any adult can access.”
According to the ERA Project, the research and advocacy organization at Columbia, Prop 1 won’t have the power to change the existing rights of parents to make decisions about the upbringing of their children. Rather, the ballot measure could support the rights of parents by preventing discriminatory interference in parental decision-making.
“There’s no reason to believe that Prop 1 in any way would override existing tried and true processes for dealing with minor health care,” Franke said. “I think the fact that there are people who oppose Proposition 1 and are raising the issue that this will somehow undermine parental authority or power with their children simply haven’t read Proposition 1, as it isn’t going to do that in any way,” she said.
Hugh Ryan, a New York author and historian whose work focuses primarily on the history of queerness, sexuality and identity in New York City, contends that opponents of Prop 1 are spreading misinformation to further a particular agenda and demonize the LGBTQ+ community.
“These groups know that by simplifying these things down to black and white issues,” Ryan said, “they can whip up a fury among people who either are not that informed about the issues or who agree with them on certain basic issues of protecting children’s lives but have not necessarily thought through what that means in regards to this piece of legislation. It’s propaganda.”
Assemblywoman Rebecca Seawright, a co-sponsor of Prop 1, represents District 76, which is Manhattan’s east side. Seawright kicked off a Sept. 25 virtual public forum with a video clip of her Assembly debate from January 24, 2023 during which she argued in support of the ERA.
Seawright explained that in today’s legal system, it is much easier to change state laws than it is to overturn a right enshrined in the state constitution.
“No one should live in fear of discrimination because of who they love, how they express their identity or who they are,” Seawright said. “I’m more optimistic than ever about our will and our ability to get this passed in November,” said Seawright. “I just want to encourage people to tell everyone they see, their neighbors, community activists and leaders to be sure and flip the ballot over and vote.”
About the author(s)
Dana Binfet is a freelance journalist and a graduate student at Columbia School of Journalism, covering the intersection of arts, culture and social justice.