In 2022 Attorney Bobbie Anne  Cox stopped New York State Democrats’ political machine from amending the Constitution to add “Proposition 1” without proper steps to put it on the ballot. She specifically warned New Yorkers to watch out for Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James. I wish more people had listened.

The New York Law Journal published the story about the lawsuit in April 2022:

Betsy Combier

From Attorney Bobbie Anne Cox, 2022: Victory!! We Just Won Another Big Case!

Holding the political elites accountable…

ATTORNEY BOBBIE ANNE COX MAY 12

I’m thrilled to announce that we just secured another BIG win for We The People! I am 2-and-0 against the tyrannical New York State government, which means good news for New Yorkers, our Constitution, and the rule of law! My lawsuit, Byrnes v. The Senate of the State of New York et al, was just decided in our favor, which means NYS Supreme Court Judge, Daniel Doyle, has upheld our Constitution whereby stopping the political elites in Albany from running roughshod on the rule of law. My co-counsel and I are enforcing the Constitution and holding our elected officials accountable. Amen!

The lawsuit was about the unconstitutional process by which the supermajority, Democrat-controlled NYS Legislature illegally tried to amend our Constitution. You can get more details by reading the judge’s decision here, but I’ll give you the CliffsNotes version below…

1. New York is controlled entirely by one party – the Democrats. They control every single aspect of our government because they have control of the State Senate, State Assembly, the Governorship, the appointment of appellate judges, and the Attorney General’s office. This is absolutely toxic. Any time you have any party (I don’t care which one) running the government with total control, it means bad news for We The People. Why? Because when one party has total control, they go totally out of control. I wrote an article on the issue which you can access here. The expression, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” is true to its core.
2. Because they have complete control of our State, the Democrats in Albany believe they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want. This is 1000% wrong. The Constitution is not optional, and there is certainly no exclusionary clause in there that says if your party controls the entire state government, then you can ignore the mandates of the people. Remember, the Constitution (federal or state) is the People’s document; it was written by us, and it tells the politicians what they can and cannot do. In other words, the Constitution was written to keep the government in check, not to keep the people in check! (More on that in my article from last year, here).
3. So the Dems in Albany want to change our NYS Constitution. They want to add language to our equal rights section (more on that below). However, instead of following the proper procedure which is clearly laid out in the Constitution itself, they instead did it their own way. In essence, they skipped a step. Wholly unacceptable, not to mention unconstitutional!
4. Their “Proposition 1” (which they like to call their “Equal Rights Amendment”) was illegally set to appear on the November 5th ballot for New Yorkers to vote on. So, my colleague and I brought a lawsuit against them… and we won! The rule of law has been upheld. If you’d like more details on the proper process vs. what the Dems actually did, you can read about it in this article by the Empire Center, here.

Of course, the Governor, the Dems in the Legislature, and the AG are all vowing to appeal our victory. Gov. Hochul is calling Judge Daniel Doyle an “extremist judge.” My response to that is, since when is following the Constitution “extremist”??? That should tell you all you need to know about the woman who unfortunately wears the title of Governor of New York.

On the flip side, this is what some opponents to Proposition 1 are saying about our win:

“Gov. Hochul and the legislature disrespect the people of the state when they so cavalierly adopt a constitutional change without following the explicit procedures set forth in the constitution for amendments.

~ NYGOP Chair Ed Cox. Read his full statement, Here.

“The Democrats that control state government think the rules don’t apply to them, which is why we repeatedly see them cut legal and ethical corners in order to achieve their political aims. While the Democrats will appeal, I urge the appellate judges who will make the next determination to be guided by the dictates of the state constitution and not politics. We all lose when the authority of our constitution is weakened, which is why I am optimistic this ruling will stand.”

~ Senator George Borrello. Read his full statement, Here.

What Is Proposition 1?

While my lawsuit has nothing at all to do with the substance of Proposition 1 (we went after the Democrats’ obstinance in not following proper constitutional procedures), I’m sure you are wondering what exactly that proposed constitutional amendment says. Here is the proposed language (bolded is new; words in brackets is old law to be omitted):

Proposing that section 11 of article 1 of the Constitution be amended to read as follows:

§11. a. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed [or] religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in [his or her] their civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.

b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.

The Proponents’ Argument

According to press statements and media announcements, the Democrats want this language added to the NYS Constitution because they say that a woman’s right to an abortion at any stage of pregnancy must be codified in our Constitution, even though it is already codified in our laws. They don’t say anything about any of the other categories they plan to add into our Constitution, other than saying nobody should be able to “discriminate” against anyone else, for any reason.

In reading multiple articles that mainstream media is publishing about my lawsuit victory, I noticed that some point out the fact that the word “abortion” does not actually appear anywhere in the proposed amendment. This article here by the Associated Press is one such instance. Yet, the media is making it clear that the Democrats are making their Proposition 1 / ERA all about abortion so they can motivate their voter base to come out and vote in November. See one article on that topic here.

The Opponents’ Argument

Those who are against the substance of Proposition 1 say it is a Trojan Horse that is full of terrible consequences if it gets back on the ballot, and passes on November 5th. Here is an excerpt from an article that Uniting NYS just posted on the issue:

Proposition One (a.k.a. the Equal Rights Amendment “ERA”)

Has Been Removed From the Ballot!

Our attorney WON the ERA lawsuit!!!  Kudos to Bobbie Anne Cox of Cox Lawyers, PLLC, and her colleague, Chris Browne, for their huge victory in Byrnes v. The State of New York, which successfully removed the ERA (aka Proposition One) off the November 5, 2024 ballot.  Their lawsuit legally challenged the Democrat-controlled NYS Legislature for the unconstitutional way in which they passed the ERA and planned to place it on the ballot in November.   While many New Yorkers were busy with everyday life, these two attorneys defended the Constitution and our civil rights. We are very grateful for them!

WHAT IS THE ERA? ERA stands for Equal Rights Amendment. It is important to oppose the ERA because we already have equal rights protections in our Constitution as well as several laws that protect equal rights, and the problem with the new language being proposed in the ERA is that Democrats added wording that contains several dangerous attacks on our rights as a New Yorkers. The new wording threatens our parental rights, free speech, girls/women’s sports, organizations, and spaces, as well as our national sovereignty by extending constitutional rights to non-citizens, including illegal aliens, and more.  It was truly a Trojan Horse!

PROPOSITION ONE would amend Section 11 of Article 1 of the New York State Constitution to prohibit discrimination against someone based on their ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, reproductive health, and autonomy.

THE NEGATIVE INTENTIONAL CONSEQUENCES:

If passed, Proposition One could:

• Prohibit educational institutions from barring males from participating in female sports.
• Allow males to use female locker rooms, restrooms, dormitories, and other related facilities.
• Allow for the abolition of single-sex high schools, colleges, social clubs such as Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, sororities, fraternities, and so on.
• Grant minors the right to make their own life-altering decisions, including medical treatments and procedures. This could encompass anything from drugs to vaccines to gender transition treatments and/or surgeries, without parental knowledge or consent.
• Ban schools from disclosing to parents when their child is considering or actually transitioning their gender.
• Extend constitutional protections to illegal aliens and non-citizens, which could include the right to vote in our elections.
• Reverse laws meant to protect our young and our elderly. For example, statutory rape laws, and the like.

THE PROPAGANDA:

Kathy Hochul and the Democrats are attempting to define the ERA/Proposition One as being all about abortion, but that is a lie and easily refuted by simply reading the text of the proposed amendment. The Democrats main message on the ERA is to protect abortion rights in New York. They have a $20 million budget to promote the Equal Rights Amendment.

The Left is not happy about our lawsuit victory.  They want the ERA back on the ballot, so they are vowing to appeal this win…

Our Attorney General, Letitia James, a Democrat who promotes the far Left’s radical position, said: “The Equal Rights Amendment was advanced to protect New Yorkers’ fundamental rights, including reproductive freedom and access to abortion care. This is a disappointing court decision, but we will appeal because New Yorkers deserve to be protected by their Constitution, especially as our basic freedoms and rights are under attack.”

Andrew Taverrite of New Yorkers for Equal Rights, a coalition that supports the ERA, stated this about the lawsuit decision: “This ruling is nothing but a baseless attack by the anti-abortion minority, and we are confident it will be overturned on appeal.”

THE TRUTH:

The truth is New York law already allows abortion until the end of the ninth month. Why are the Democrats so focused on abortion rights when we have laws that protect them already? That is because they don’t want people to know what else the ERA will do. They are hoping most people are not smart enough to read the ERA and discern what could happen.

Former Congressman and 2022 Gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin and others are speaking out against the ERA/Proposition One.

His press conference gives an excellent explanation about why this is about more than abortion rights.  Watch it HERE.

An ERA Has Failed Before

This is nothing new. Democrats have tried to pass an ERA before, and particularly in the 1970’s. The initiative was faced with massive opposition, and ultimately failed.

The logic behind the opposition was similar back then as it is today. In essence, the opponents say, an “Equal Rights” amendment sounds great… until you look at who it is giving “equal rights” to, and at who’s expense. They say giving equal rights to males that want to identify as females means you are abolishing women’s rights. Are you going to let the male who feels like being a female compete in women’s sports, use women’s bathrooms, and locker rooms, and dormitories, etc. to the detriment of women whose rights are being invaded?

It’s a highly charged and very controversial issue. Fortunately, none of that is involved in my lawsuit. It has nothing to do with the substance and everything to do with accountability, and ensuring these political elites honor and obey their oath to uphold the Constitution.

From a legal standpoint, if the Democrats want to propose this amendment to our Constitution, then they will have to start all over and do it properly… in accordance with our Constitution, and not just any old way they feel like doing it. That is the will of the People!