What states have not ratified the ERA?

Quick answer: Which states have not ratified the ERA (1943 constitution bill of rights context)

One-sentence summary

State-level trackers show that by 2026 thirty-eight states had submitted instruments of ratification for the Equal Rights Amendment, leaving twelve states that had not ratified according to major trackers, although legal disputes mean that a simple tally does not resolve whether the amendment is part of the Constitution.

The count of ratifying states is the starting point for the question, but the numerical total alone does not determine whether the ERA has been certified as an amendment because of a congressional deadline and disputes over rescissions, which have been noted by official and legal analyses National Archives and Records Administration. For the National Archives press statement on certification questions see their 2025 statement.

Snapshot of the number of ratifications and non-ratifications

Trackers that compile state legislative actions report thirty-eight states filed instruments of ratification by 2026, including late ratifications that drew attention in recent years such as Nevada, Illinois, and Virginia, and they list a remaining group of twelve non-ratifying states for reference Ballotpedia’s ERA page (see Michael Carbonara’s ERA timeline for related coverage on later ratification steps).

Why the simple count does not settle the question

Legal analysis and federal statements emphasize that whether an amendment has been adopted depends on both the state ratifications and procedural requirements such as the original congressional deadline and the question of whether some states’ later rescissions are legally effective, matters discussed in Congressional Research Service reporting CRS analysis. For an additional CRS background product see Congress.gov CRS product.

Those who argue rescissions are valid point to state law and legislative authority, while others contend that once an instrument of ratification is properly filed the later vote cannot undo a prior constitutional act; the National Archives has noted procedural questions that complicate certification National Archives and Records Administration.

What the Equal Rights Amendment is and why its status is contested – 1943 constitution bill of rights reference

Short definition of the ERA

The Equal Rights Amendment is a proposed change to the U.S. Constitution intended to guarantee that rights cannot be denied or abridged on the basis of sex; summaries and explainers describe its drafting and purpose in plain terms for readers seeking context Associated Press explainer. For related background on constitutional rights see the constitutional rights hub on Michael Carbonara’s site.

Brief history of the original proposal and congressional deadline

Congress originally proposed the ERA with a deadline attached in the 1970s, and that deadline has become central to later debates because it affects when and whether late state ratifications might be accepted; legal discussions of that deadline and its implications appear in CRS reports and archival statements CRS analysis.

Why status matters for constitutional law and public debate

The practical consequence is that the amendment’s legal status influences litigation, federal agency guidance, and public policy debates; different federal offices and courts have taken varying positions on whether the Archivist should recognize later ratifications or whether procedural obstacles remain DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

Which states have not ratified the ERA – state-by-state list and how trackers count them

How Ballotpedia and NCSL present state action

Major tracking organizations record legislative actions, ratification instruments, and related votes; they present timelines and citations to state documents so readers can see when legislatures acted and whether instruments were filed, and those trackers are the primary sources journalists and researchers cite Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

A state-by-state listing of the non-ratifying states as of 2026 (summary, not full legislative text)

According to state-tracker compilations, twelve states had not ratified the ERA by 2026; trackers list each state and note any relevant legislative votes or resolutions that fell short of filing a ratification instrument NCSL’s ERA overview.

The trackers present the non-ratifying states as named entries with short notes on activity; a concise list is useful for readers who want the names and a pointer to the primary state record for verification (the trackers themselves link or cite the state legislative journals and filings) Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

Notes on states with partial or disputed actions

Some states show legislative resolutions, rescission votes, or other actions that trackers flag as notable but not equivalent to an unambiguous, uncontested instrument of ratification; these nuances are recorded in the tracker entries so readers can follow whether a state took a full ratification step or merely debated the amendment NCSL’s ERA overview.

How ratification, rescission, and deadlines affect whether a state ‘counts’ – legal framework and tests (1943 constitution bill of rights)

What rescission means and the arguments for and against their validity

A rescission occurs when a state legislature passes a subsequent resolution purporting to withdraw a prior ratification; analysts disagree about whether rescissions from the 1970s and 1980s are legally effective, and CRS reporting and archival discussion summarize the foundational questions courts would need to resolve CRS analysis.

Those who argue rescissions are valid point to state law and legislative authority, while others contend that once an instrument of ratification is properly filed the later vote cannot undo a prior constitutional act; the National Archives has noted procedural questions that complicate certification National Archives and Records Administration.

Because courts have considered rescissions differently in litigation, the practical effect is that whether a state ‘counts’ can depend on a judicial ruling rather than solely on a state legislature’s record CRS analysis.

The role of the congressional deadline and whether it can be altered

Congress attached a deadline to the ERA proposal in the 1970s, and later extensions and challenges to that schedule have driven disputes over whether ratifications after the deadline are constitutionally valid; legal memoranda and statutory history are central to this debate and are summarized in DOJ and CRS documents DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

How courts have approached conflicting legal questions

Federal litigation over certification and rescission has produced differing rulings and stays, which means that courts remain a likely route for final answers; CRS reporting describes the major legal arguments and how courts have treated the competing claims to date CRS analysis.

Recent developments: late ratifications, NARA responses, and ongoing litigation

Timeline of key late ratifications and NARA statements

In the late 2010s and 2020s several states took steps to ratify the ERA after the earlier deadline period; trackers identify notable late ratifications such as Nevada in 2017, Illinois in 2018, and Virginia in 2020, which proponents cite when arguing the required number of states has been reached Ballotpedia’s ERA page (see commentary at Center for American Progress).

Major litigation milestones and conflicting rulings

Lawsuits and administrative filings have sought declaratory judgments and asked the courts or the Archivist to certify the amendment; litigation timelines and differing outcomes are summarized in CRS material that explains how procedural orders and stays have affected certification attempts CRS analysis.

What the DOJ opinion changed in the public debate

The Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued a 2020 opinion concluding that the Archivist could recognize late ratifications despite the original congressional deadline, a legal view relied on by proponents of certification although it does not by itself resolve the dispute in court or by statute DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

What would resolve the uncertainty: congressional and judicial pathways

How Congress could act to change or remove a deadline

Congress has tools that could resolve the uncertainty; for example, it could pass a joint resolution to remove or retroactively change the ratification deadline, a route discussed in Congressional Research Service analysis as one constitutional and political option for clearing certification obstacles CRS analysis.

Possible court decisions that could settle rescission questions

Court rulings that decide whether rescissions are legally effective or that interpret the scope of Congress’s deadline authority could settle whether particular state actions count, and courts have already played a central role in the dispute over certification National Archives and Records Administration.

Practical steps for final certification

Because no congressional fix had produced undisputed certification by 2026, practical resolution would likely require either a clear congressional action followed by Archivist certification or a definitive judicial decision addressing the deadline and rescission questions CRS analysis.

Common misunderstandings and pitfalls when tracking ERA ratification

Mistaking a state tracker count for legal certification

One common error is treating a tracker tally of ratifying states as equivalent to final constitutional certification; trackers are valuable summaries, but they do not by themselves resolve procedural or legal questions that may affect certification Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

Confusing ratification dates with certification by the Archivist

Another frequent mistake is assuming that a state’s ratification date automatically results in Archivist certification; the Archivist’s action follows procedural review and can be affected by legal objections, as described in the National Archives statements about certification questions National Archives and Records Administration.

Misreading rescission votes or legislative resolutions

Finally, readers sometimes take a rescission resolution or a non-binding legislative statement as equivalent to final state ratification or rejection; trackers note where rescissions have been recorded and where legislative language is advisory rather than an instrument of ratification NCSL’s ERA overview.

How to check the current status and primary sources

Official sources to consult (NARA, DOJ, CRS)

When checking current status, start with the National Archives for official statements and filings, consult the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion for legal analysis of late ratifications, and review Congressional Research Service reports for neutral summaries of the outstanding legal questions National Archives and Records Administration.

State-tracker resources and what they show

For state-by-state detail, Ballotpedia and NCSL compile legislative actions and often link to the primary state documents so readers can verify whether a legislature filed an instrument or merely debated the measure Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

How to read a ratification instrument or state resolution

A ratification instrument is a formal document sent by a state to the National Archives; readers checking a state’s entry should look for that filed instrument and any cited legislative journal or certified copy, and they should note whether the tracker links to the filed document or to a legislative vote record Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

Conclusion: Where things stand and what to watch next

Recap of the current factual situation

By 2026 thirty-eight states had submitted ratifications according to trackers, but legal disputes about the congressional deadline and state rescissions mean that certification remains contested rather than settled Ballotpedia’s ERA page.

Key open questions to follow

Watch for a congressional resolution that explicitly addresses the deadline, for decisive court rulings on the legal effect of rescissions, and for any Archivist action that follows clear legal or congressional guidance CRS analysis.

Simple next-step recommendations for readers who want updates

To stay current, check the National Archives for filings and statements, consult Ballotpedia or NCSL for state-by-state tracking, and review CRS and DOJ OLC documents for legal analysis as litigation and legislation proceed National Archives and Records Administration.