Proponents and detractors spend big on New York Equal Rights Amendment

A ruling from the state’s highest court last week means that the state Equal Rights Amendment is back on the November ballot – and both proponents and opponents are bringing in cash to get their message out to voters about the proposed state constitutional amendment.

The pro-ERA New Yorkers for Equal Rights recorded about $1.6 million in contributions in the first half of 2024 as the group gears up its planned $20 million effort to get the amendment approved by voters. Top donors include the political arms of the New York Civil Liberties Union, the National Institute of Reproductive Health, various branches of Planned Parenthood and SEIU New York State. Broadway producer and fundraiser for LGBTQ causes Ted Snowdon also gave $50,000 to the committee, while state Sen. Liz Krueger – the original sponsor of the measure – gave $5,000 of her own money as well. “New Yorkers for Equal Rights is proud to be powered by a broad and strong coalition across the Empire State,” said coalition spokesperson Andrew Taverrite, who touted that more than 275 organizations contributed to the committee.

Supporters of the amendment have focused largely on the abortion rights aspect of the measure. It would enshrine the right to an abortion in the state constitution by prohibiting discrimination based on “pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes.” It would also enshrine a variety of other rights and anti-discrimination protections based on age, gender identity and ethnicity.

On the opposite side of the fight is the Coalition to Protect Kids, which has distanced itself from the abortion facets of the amendment in favor of issues with the protections it grants based on gender identity and age. Supported by conservatives, the group has warned about the impact on women’s sports due to protections it would ensure for transgender athletes and about far-reaching effects of measures to prevent discrimination on age, claiming it would allow minors to get medical procedures – including gender-affirming care – without parental consent.

Although the group’s executive director previously told City & State they would not be advocating against the measure if it only addressed abortion, the Coalition to Protect Kids is funded almost exclusively by anti-abortion activist Carol Crossed. She has given $250,000 out of the $275,000 that the group has raised so far.

Crossed, who resides in the Rochester area, is the vice president of the anti-abortion group Feminists Choosing Life of New York and co-founded Democrats for Life of America. The Coalition to Protect Kids and opposition to the state ERA is featured prominently on the Feminists Choosing Life website. Crossed broadly advocates for “pro-life” measures, opposing things like the death penalty, assisted suicide and war. Most recently, though, that has looked like opposing abortion. Crossed was featured earlier this year in a report from Spectrum News in Rochester about a monthly anti-abortion protest outside of Planned Parenthood. “We’re standing up to anti-abortion extremists and are educating New Yorkers to vote yes to protect our rights and reproductive freedoms on the ballot,” Taverrite said.

Spokespeople for the Coalition to Protect Kids rejected the idea that they are being funded primarily by an anti-abortion activist. William O’Reilly, a Republican consultant working for the group, said that Crossed is “best known as a human rights advocate” and said that she was “instrumental” in stopping New York’s death penalty. Crossed wrote an op-ed last year in opposition to the death penalty while drawing comparisons between abortion and capital punishment.

“The Coalition is grateful to all of its current and future donors for having the foresight to fight this dangerous initiative,” said coalition spokesperson Ayesha Kreutz. “Prop One is a broadly and haphazardly written ballot issue that could adversely affect New York children, parents, women's sports teams, voting rights and senior citizens. Any objective read of Prop One should cause alarm bells to ring.”

The ballot measure has gone through some legal complications as a result of a Republican challenge to the amendment. A lower court initially knocked it off the November ballot, ruling that Democrats in the state Legislature didn’t properly approve the measure. But an appellate court reversed the decision, and the state’s Court of Appeals – the highest court – dismissed the latest appeal. It all but assures that the amendment will in fact go before voters later this year.