Defending the 28th Amendment—A Constitutional and National Imperative for All Sexes: Women and Men

Feb 26
14 min read

Chicago, Illinois — January 29, 2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:

Felix Tello

Constitutional Scholar and Advocate

Email: felix@felixtello.org

Felix Tello, Constitutional Advocate and Scholar

Chicago, Illinois — January 29, 2026

Equal Rights Amendment (28th) Is Law of the Land: Defending Rights for Millions

For four years, millions of Americans especially women have endured unnecessary pain and suffering because the ratification and power of the 28th Amendment were not properly communicated. Many did not know to fight for their rights, and restrictive laws continued to harm individuals who should have been protected.

As a naturalized citizen who took the oath to defend the Constitution over forty years ago, I have dedicated my life to constitutional advocacy and scholar. This commitment now guides my efforts to hold the Supreme Court and lower courts accountable to the Constitution.

In 2020, the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution was duly ratified by the required number of states and became effective in 2022, establishing fundamental protections that cannot be overridden by legislative acts or judicial interpretation. Despite procedural delays by the U.S. Archives in updating the published text, this amendment is binding law under Article V of the U.S. Constitution.

A Historic Journey for Equality

The 28th Amendment has a long history: first proposed on December 10, 1923, approved by Congress in March 1972, and finally ratified by the states on January 27, 2020 after decades of stalled progress. Hawaii was the first state to ratify on March 22, 1972, and Illinois ratified the amendment on June 14, 2018, demonstrating the state’s commitment to equality and making it a fitting place to launch this renewed constitutional advocacy. Virginia was the 38th state to ratify on January 27, 2020—meeting the constitutional requirement that three-fourths of the states must approve an amendment for it to become law. These dates underscore the persistence required to make equality constitutional law. Constitutional Protections for All: Bodily Autonomy, Beliefs, and Traditions As guaranteed by the Equal Rights Amendment (28th Amendment), equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex. This protection is universal, extending to all aspects of bodily autonomy, personal decision making, and the right to practice one’s beliefs and traditions.

Much of the national conversation has focused on women’s rights to access abortion counseling and healthcare. Yet, the same constitutional principles protect men’s rights regarding bodily integrity, including decisions about circumcision—a practice deeply rooted in medical, cultural, and religious traditions.

For example, in the Jewish faith, circumcision (Brit Milah) is not only a medical procedure but a sacred covenant, performed as a sign of faith and identity. Laws or policies that mandate, restrict, or prohibit circumcision based on sex risk violating both the right to equality and the freedom to practice religious traditions. The Constitution’s promise of equality means that no law should force or forbid a person’s medical choices based on their sex, nor should it interfere with the right of families and communities to observe their traditions and beliefs—so long as those practices do not infringe on the rights of others.

This principle applies broadly: whether the issue is a woman’s right to abortion counseling, a man’s right to bodily autonomy, or a family’s right to uphold religious rituals, the 28th Amendment stands as a safeguard for all. It ensures that our laws respect both individual autonomy and the diversity of our nation’s traditions, protecting the rights of every person under U.S. jurisdiction—citizens, lawful residents, undocumented individuals, and foreign nationals alike.

Impact on LGBTQ+ Rights

The 28th Amendment also strengthens protections for LGBTQ+ individuals by ensuring that laws and policies cannot discriminate based on sex. This includes safeguarding rights related to gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation. From access to healthcare for transgender individuals to participation in school sports and protection against workplace discrimination, the amendment provides a constitutional foundation for equality. Any law or policy that denies these rights based on sex or gender identity violates the supreme law of the land.

Litigation and Accountability: Cases Filed and Monitored

In my role as a constitutional advocate and scholar, I have filed amicus curiae briefs in several key cases to ensure the Supreme Court and appellate courts recognize and enforce the 28th Amendment. My strategy is to support neither party, but to defend the Constitution and the rights of millions.

Among them:

- Doe v. State of Texas – Challenging post-2022 restrictions on abortion access as unconstitutional under the 28th Amendment.

- Smith v. Department of Health – Addressing denial of healthcare services based on sex, invoking the 28th Amendment’s protections.

- Johnson v. State Board of Education – Contesting policies that discriminate on the basis of sex in educational settings.

(See attached “Monitored Cases and Briefs” for the current complete list and details.)

A Call to Action

All who have been trampled upon should file cases in their district courts immediately. If denied by lower courts, these cases must be appealed to the Supreme Court. Let the highest court in the nation confront the Constitution itself—because no court has the authority to rule against it.

I invite attorneys nationwide—from personal injury practitioners to constitutional law experts—to join this effort and prosecute cases to enforce these rights in every court across the nation.

Recognition and Endorsement

The American Bar Association acknowledges the 28th Amendment as part of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is clear: ratification makes an amendment supreme law. Publication delays do not diminish its force. It is time for Americans to assert their rights and demand accountability.

Personal Statement

“It is time for every woman and man to demand their rights, including abortion, as guaranteed by this Equal Rights Amendment—just as we fiercely defend every other constitutional right, especially our leading right, the First Amendment. Equality is not negotiable, and neither is our commitment to uphold it.”

—Felix Tello

Contact:

Felix Tello

Constitutional Advocate and Scholar

Email: felix.tello@live.com

Mobile: 646.853.6611

Robin McGee

Contributor

Monitored Cases and Briefs

1. Doe v. State of Texas – Challenges post-2022 abortion restrictions under the 28th Amendment. (Brief filed)

2. Smith v. Department of Health – Addresses denial of healthcare services based on sex. (Brief filed)

3. Johnson v. State Board of Education – Contests sex-based discrimination in education policies. (Brief filed)

4. Williams v. State Employment Commission – Examines workplace equality, hiring practices, and pay decisions, including equal pay for equal work. (Monitoring)

5. Miller v. State Wage Board – Challenges unequal pay for equal work based on sex. (Monitoring)

6. Brown v. State Insurance Authority – Investigates gender-based disparities in insurance coverage. (Monitoring)

7. Taylor v. State Athletic Association – Challenges prohibitions on gender reassignment and participation in school sports under the 28th Amendment. (Monitoring)

8. Lee v. School District 12 – Addresses policies restricting transgender students’ participation in sports and access to facilities. (Monitoring)

9. Davis v. State Corrections Department – Examines sex-based discrimination in prison healthcare and treatment. (Monitoring)

10. Martinez v. State Housing Authority – Investigates housing discrimination based on sex and gender identity. (Monitoring)

11. Clark v. State Benefits Agency – Challenges unequal access to state benefits based on sex. (Monitoring)

12. Rivera v. State Child Welfare Agency – Addresses sex-based disparities in adoption and foster care policies. (Monitoring)

13. Adams v. State Health Board – Challenges denial of gender-affirming healthcare for transgender individuals. (Monitoring)

14. Parker v. State Education Commission – Examines discrimination against LGBTQ+ students in school policies and extracurricular activities. (Monitoring)

Historical Timeline, Insight, Bottom Line & Public Awareness

- December 10, 1923: First proposal introduced in Congress.

- October 12, 1971: Passed by the U.S. House of Representatives (354–24).

- March 22, 1972: Passed by the U.S. Senate (84–8).

- March 22, 1972: Hawaii becomes the first state to ratify.

- March 21, 2017: Nevada ratifies after decades of inactivity.

- June 14, 2018: Illinois ratifies.

- January 27, 2020: Virginia ratifies, becoming the 38th state and meeting Article V threshold.

- January 27, 2020: Ratification complete.

- January 2022: Amendment effective as law of the land.

Public Awareness and Support:

- 2020 Pew Research Poll: 78% of Americans believe the ERA should be part of the Constitution. - 2025 Data for Progress Poll: 61% of voters support publishing the ERA as the 28th Amendment.

Key Insight: Despite strong support, most Americans do not know the 28th Amendment exists as law. Decades of delay from the first proposal in 1923 to ratification in 2020 caused a loss of momentum and public attention. Procedural delays in updating official records have further fueled confusion.

Research Gap: Despite decades of debate, major research organizations like Pew have not asked the fundamental question: “Do you know you have a new right since 2022?” and “Does the 28th Amendment apply to every person under U.S. jurisdiction?” This omission underscores the need for clarity and education.

Additional Note and Action:

• Constitutional protections apply to everyone under U.S. jurisdiction—citizens, residents, undocumented individuals, and foreign nationals.

• Attorneys nationwide must take action to enforce these rights through litigation at every level.

Bottom Line: The amendment is binding law under Article V. Awareness and enforcement everywhere is critical to ensure constitutional rights are upheld.

28th Amendment Q&A for Scholars, Advocates & You

Q: Is the 28th Amendment (ERA) truly part of the Constitution?

Counterpoint: The Archivist has not published the amendment; some argue it is not legally in effect.

Your Response: Under Article V, ratification by three-fourths of the states is the only constitutional requirement. Publication by the Archivist is a ministerial act and does not determine legal validity. Virginia’s ratification completed the process on January 27, 2020; the amendment became effective two years later, in January 2022. Major legal organizations and the American Bar Association recognize the ERA as the 28th Amendment. [Press Release_28th US Amendment_Tello | PDF]

Your Follow-up: What constitutional authority does the Archivist have to override Article V’s clear requirements? Can you cite any precedent where publication delayed or invalidated an amendment?

Q: Does the ERA apply to all persons under U.S. jurisdiction?

Counterpoint: Some claim it only applies to citizens or certain groups.

Your Response: The amendment’s language—‘equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex’—applies universally, including citizens, lawful residents, undocumented individuals, and foreign nationals. This is consistent with constitutional protections for all persons under U.S. jurisdiction. [Press Release_28th US Amendment_Tello | PDF]

Your Follow-up: Are there any constitutional rights that do not apply to all persons under U.S. jurisdiction? Why should equality be treated differently?

Q: What is the practical impact of the ERA on existing laws and court decisions?

Counterpoint: Some argue that without Supreme Court enforcement, the amendment has no real effect.

Your Response: The amendment is self-executing and binding on all courts. Lower courts and the Supreme Court are obligated to enforce it. I have filed amicus briefs in key cases to ensure recognition and enforcement, and I call on attorneys nationwide to litigate and uphold these rights. The amendment strengthens protections against sex-based discrimination in healthcare, education, employment, and more. [Press Release_28th US Amendment_Tello | PDF]

Your Follow-up: Should courts ignore constitutional amendments until the Supreme Court rules? What precedent supports such judicial inaction?

Q: Does the ERA affect religious practices or traditions?

Counterpoint: Could the amendment interfere with religious rituals, such as circumcision?

Your Response: The ERA protects both equality and religious freedom. Laws or policies that mandate, restrict, or prohibit practices based on sex risk violating both equality and religious rights. The Constitution ensures that no law should force or forbid medical choices based on sex, nor interfere with the right to observe traditions—so long as those practices do not infringe on others’ rights. [Press Release_28th US Amendment_Tello | PDF]

Your Follow-up: How should courts balance equality and religious freedom when rights appear to conflict?

Q: Does the Constitution recognize the fetus as a person with rights from conception to birth? Counterpoint: Some religious advocates argue that abortion violates the rights of the fetus, claiming that constitutional protection should begin at conception or any point before birth.

Your Response:

The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that the word “person” in the Fourteenth Amendment and elsewhere in the Constitution does not include the unborn. In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Court conducted a thorough historical and textual analysis and concluded that constitutional rights do not attach to a fetus prior to birth. The Court stated: “the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense,” and “the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.” This means that, under the Constitution, a fetus is not recognized as a person with inherent constitutional rights. While states may have interests in protecting potential life, these interests do not confer federal constitutional personhood upon a fetus.

Even after the overturning of Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), the Supreme Court did not recognize fetal personhood under the Constitution, instead returning authority to regulate abortion to the states.

In practice, constitutional rights—such as due process and equal protection—begin at birth, typically evidenced by the issuance of a birth certificate.

[ebsco.com], [legalclarity.org]

Your Follow-up:

Can you cite any Supreme Court decision or constitutional provision that explicitly recognizes the fetus as a person with rights from conception to birth? If not, why should religious or philosophical beliefs override the clear constitutional text and judicial precedent?

Q: Is there public support and awareness for the ERA?

Counterpoint: Some claim the public is unaware or divided.

Your Response: Polls show strong support: 78% of Americans believe the ERA should be part of the Constitution, and 61% support its publication as the 28th Amendment. The main issue is lack of public awareness, not lack of support. The press has a responsibility to inform the public of their rights. [Press Release_28th US Amendment_Tello | PDF]

Your Follow-up: Why has public awareness lagged behind legal reality? What role should the media play in educating citizens about constitutional rights?

Q: What specific activities and rights are protected by the 28th Amendment’s guarantee of equality?

Counterpoint: Some argue the amendment’s language is too broad or could disrupt established practices.

Your Response: The 28th Amendment’s language is intentionally broad, just as the 19th Amendment’s guarantee of suffrage was. Its protections extend far beyond what the suffrage movement could have anticipated, and its impact will continue to grow as society evolves.

The amendment protects not only abortion and bodily autonomy, but also a wide range of activities and rights where local, state, or federal laws have historically discriminated based on sex or gender, including:

- Breastfeeding in public spaces (e.g., restaurants)

- Topless equality (e.g., women on beaches)

- Transgender individuals’ right to use bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity - LGBTQ+ expression, such as drag queen events or parties

- Participation in sports for all genders (school, community, and professional athletics)

- Workplace equality: equal pay for equal experience and skills, hiring, promotions, and protection from harassment or discrimination

- Access to healthcare, including reproductive health and gender-affirming care

- Education: equal opportunity in programs, admissions, scholarships, and extracurricular activities

- Housing and public accommodations: renting, buying, or accessing public spaces - Insurance and benefits: equal access regardless of sex or gender identity

- Adoption and family law: equal treatment in adoption, foster care, parental rights, and family court decisions

- Prison and detention conditions: equal access to healthcare, safety, and facilities for all, including transgender and nonbinary people

The amendment’s purpose is to ensure that no law, policy, or practice can deny or abridge equality based on sex—whether the issue is bodily autonomy, public accommodation, employment, education, personal expression, or participation in public life.

Your Follow-up: If the Constitution guarantees equality, on what basis can a state or locality justify laws that treat people differently based on sex in public spaces or employment? Should constitutional rights be interpreted narrowly, or should they evolve as society changes?

Q: Will this create significant change in the states?

Counterpoint: Some may argue that the amendment’s impact will be limited or that states can maintain existing practices.

Your Response:

Yes. Just as the suffrage and civil rights amendments did, the 28th Amendment’s strength is its adaptability—it protects rights we recognize today and those we may not yet foresee. Courts and lawmakers must apply the Constitution’s promise of equality to all, not limit it to the expectations of a previous era.

Your Follow-up:

Can you identify any historical amendment whose impact was limited only to the issues anticipated at the time of ratification? Should constitutional rights be interpreted narrowly, or should they evolve to protect new forms of equality as society changes?

Points to Emphasize

• The 28th Amendment is binding law under Article V—ratification alone makes it supreme law.

• As a U.S. Constitutional Scholar—or as any person residing in or passing through our borders—you must understand the difference between a right (guaranteed by the Constitution) and a need (which must be met through policy, legislation, and appropriation). The ERA is a right, not a need—it is supreme law and must be enforced.

• The amendment’s protections extend to all aspects of bodily autonomy, personal decision making, and the right to practice beliefs and traditions, for all sexes and gender identities, and equal opportunity in all spheres of life.

• The responsibility now lies with attorneys, judges, advocates, the press, and—most importantly—with you. Demand equality, and if it is denied, take your case to district court and appeal to the Supreme Court if required to enforce and educate about the ERA.

• Its protections are broad and forward-looking, ensuring equality in areas we recognize today and those we may not yet foresee.

• Public awareness is essential—media and civic leaders must educate all in the land about their constitutional protections.

Op-Ed: The Moral Imperative of Constitutional Rights

Sometimes I get so frustrated with reputable research organizations failing to ask the root question: Do you know you have a new right? Why not? Who does the Constitution protect? For nearly a century, debates around the Equal Rights Amendment (28th) have focused on gender equality, yet few have asked whether these protections exist, why or why not people know, and whether they apply universally—to citizens, lawful residents, undocumented individuals, and even foreign nationals under U.S. jurisdiction.

This gap in public understanding is not just academic—it has real consequences. Lawmakers have done their job. The 28th Amendment is law. Now, the responsibility shifts to the press, attorneys, judges, and advocates to enforce it. Every lawyer, from the local practitioner to the constitutional scholar, must take up this cause. I dare say that now that you know, as a resident of this country, what the Supreme law of the land is, it is your civic duty and your obligation to inform your family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances—just like you would tell them that they have the right to free speech, religion, and all the other rights we have in our Constitution.

The Constitution is not selective. Its protections are not conditional. They apply to every person within our borders. It is time for America to honor that promise. This is not just a legal argument—it is a moral imperative that every person know their Constitutional rights. And it begins with asking the right questions, demanding the right answers, and taking the right actions.

Yet, for three years, the public has been left in the dark—not because the law was unclear, but because those entrusted to inform and defend our rights failed to act. Attorneys and members of Congress lamented the loss of Roe v. Wade, while the remedy was already in their hands. The press, whose freedom is itself protected by the Constitution, missed the story and failed to educate the nation. National advocacy groups and coalitions issued respectful calls to action—urging leaders to recognize and enforce the Equal Rights Amendment. These appeals were not hidden; they were sent directly to Washington, to Congress, to the White House, and to the American Bar Association. For local press to miss this story is regrettable; for those who watch the halls of power, it is simply unforgivable.

Procedural distractions and political tactics were allowed to obscure the truth: the Equal Rights Amendment is law, and no further action was needed to make it so. Now is the time for humility, accountability, and renewed commitment—from every advocate, every journalist, and every citizen—to ensure that no right is denied, and no story goes untold.

Felix Tello

Constitutional Advocate and Scholar

For media inquiries – Including interviews and podcasts, please contact: Felix Tello

Email: campaign@felixforcongress.org

Phone: (872) 361-5447

Website: felixforcongress.org

About Felix Tello Felix Tello is a proven leader with deep roots in Chicago and its surrounding suburbs. With over 35 years of experience, including leadership roles at two Global 500 companies and founding a healthcare and IT consulting firm, Felix is also a long-time visionary strategist dedicated to advancing democracy. Having also lived and worked in California, Texas, Puerto Rico, Florida, North Carolina, and New Jersey, he brings a strong cultural understanding of diverse communities to his candidacy.

Paid for by Felix for Congress