The court's ruling in Freeman is in conflict with both the Supreme Court's apparent trend involving article V issues, and most of the recent scholarly opinion on point. As a result of this departure, and the fact that the ERA failed to be adopted, this decision is likely to have slight precedential value. Nonetheless, the district court's discussion of the ERA in light of recent changes in the political question doctrine has significance in interpreting article V.
"Constitutional Amendment; Rescission of Ratification; Extension of Ratification Period, State of Idaho v. Freeman,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 16
, Article 8.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol16/iss1/8