Minnesota Democrats have introduced a new proposed amendment to the state’s constitution that would protect abortion and LGBTQ rights, among other things. The Minnesota Equal Rights Amendment is set to have its first legislative hearing and, if approved by lawmakers and voters, would be one of the most expansive protections of these rights in the nation. Supporters of the amendment argue that it is necessary to address issues of pay inequity, discrimination, and stereotypes that have persisted over generations.
House Majority Leader Jamie Long has expressed strong support for the ERA proposal, emphasizing the importance of upholding values such as equity, non-discrimination, and reproductive freedom. However, Republican leaders have not yet indicated whether they will support or oppose the amendment. Opponents, including anti-abortion groups, religious organizations, and conservative lawmakers, view the proposal as overreaching and divisive, raising concerns about its potential impact on religious freedom.
The proposed amendment would prohibit the state from discriminating against individuals based on various factors including race, disability, and gender identity. If approved by the Legislature, voters in 2026 would be asked to vote on whether all persons should be guaranteed equal rights under state laws and protected from discrimination. Groups opposing the proposal include the Minnesota Family Council, Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, and the Minnesota Catholic Conference.
Last year, a similar ERA proposal passed in the Senate but did not receive a final vote in the House. Democratic lawmakers have highlighted the need to protect the transgender community and reproductive rights, especially in the face of increasing attacks and the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court. With narrow majorities in each chamber, Democrats are relying on the support of most members of their party to advance the legislation, particularly if Republicans oppose it. If placed on the ballot, the constitutional amendment would require approval from a majority of all voters casting ballots.
The Minnesota ERA would differ from the state’s Human Rights Act, as it would amend the state constitution to provide additional protections for abortion and gender expression. Advocates believe that the language in the proposed amendment is crucial to preventing the state from banning these rights. Megan Peterson, executive director of Gender Justice, a gender equity advocacy organization involved in crafting the ERA proposal, stresses the importance of ensuring that laws protecting these rights are enshrined in the state constitution to prevent future repeals or restrictions.
