Joseph C. O'Mahoney

The letter, addressed to O'Mahoney as a member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, asks for him to vote in favor of moving the Equal Rights Amendment out of committee and onto the Senate floor.

The letter, signed by leaders of a number of women's groups, asked for O'Mahoney's continued efforts to secure the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment before the U.S. Senate recess in 1944. Alice Paul was one of the letter's signees.

Miller asks O'Mahoney to push for a vote on the Equal Rights Amendment before the U.S. Senate adjourns in 1958.

The bulletin details which U.S. Senators have still not yet given their support to the Equal Rights Amendment as of March of 1958.

The report recommends that the Equal Rights Amendment be brought to a vote on the U.S. Senate floor.

This joint resolution of the U.S. Congress proposes the Equal Rights Amendment in 1957.

Pollitzer reminds O'Mahoney that the Equal Rights Amendment has 37 official Senate sponsors and 242 official House sponsors. She urges him to include the ERA as one of the Democratic congressional objectives for the upcoming legislative session.

Hook, who is the Dean of the American College for Girls in Istanbul, Turkey, writes that the failure to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the U.S. is an international issue. O'Mahoney responds that he has been a staunch supporter of the ERA.

The bulletin addresses the upcoming 1958 vote on the Equal Rights Amendment in the U.S. Senate. It also outlines the Hayden rider, which adds language to the amendment that ERA proponents argue essentially nullifies the principle of equality of the sexes.

This report outlines the different views of women's groups with respect to the Equal Rights Amendment and concludes that laws with respect to women's rights should be made by the states and not through an amendment to the U.S. constitution.

Wiley, of Greybull, Wyoming, writes to O'Mahoney urging him to vote in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.

Marconnier, writing on behalf of the National Consumers' League, voices opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment as she fears it will jeopardize laws that have been passed that protect women workers. She asks that O'Mahoney, who serves on the  Senate Judiciary Committee, vote against it.

Moncure, an attorney representing the National Association of Women Lawyers, voices her support of the Equal Rights Amendment. She provides counter arguments to those made by opponents of the ERA.

Rieve, writing as the President of the American Federation of Hosiery Workers, argues against the Equal Rights Amendment. He notes that members of the union, many of whom are women, have fought for protective legislation and fears that the ERA would void that legislation.

Lynch, writing as President of the Business Women's Legislative Council of California, urges O'Mahoney to support the ERA in order to "right the injustice done women in 1787." The letter is representative of many O'Mahoney received from states far removed from Wyoming.

This joint resolution of the U.S. Congress proposes the Equal Rights Amendment in 1937. The amendment reads "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction."

Wiley, representing the National Woman's Party, writes O'Mahoney who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee. She urges him to report the Equal Rights Amendment out to the floor of the Senate as soon as possible.

Knight, representing the Laramie, Wyoming branch of the National Woman's Party, writes O'Mahoney to thank him for his work on the Senate Judiciary Committee and encourages him to bring the Equal Rights Amendment to a Senate vote.

Johnson, representing The National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, writes to O'Mahoney about the thirteen million American women now employed and urges him to vote favorably on the Equal Rights Amendment.

The Women's Joint Legislative Committee for Equal Rights, which represents more than 3 million members, urges O'Mahoney to work to secure the Equal Rights Amendment's immediate passage.

McAllister, representing the National Committee to Defeat the Un-Equal Rights Amendment, writes that she represents twenty-five national organizations opposed to the Equal Rights Amendment.

Pollitzer, writing on behalf of the National Woman's Party, tells O'Mahoney that they are equally willing to support the original language of the Equal Rights Amdenment or a substitute draft that reads "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex."

Horton, representing the Laramie Branch of the American Association of University Women, writes in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment. This is particularly notable, as the national American Association of University Women has taken a position against the ERA.

Koehler, representing the Wyoming State Division of the American Association of University Women, urges O'Mahoney to vote against the Equal Rights Amendment.

Miller, writing on behalf of the National Woman's Party expresses her concern that O'Mahoney is "being deluged with appeals from members of the League of Women Voters and the American Association of University Women" asking him to vote against the ERA. Miller points out that millions more women are part of organizations that favor the ERA.

This article in a publication of the National Woman's Party discusses the recent passage of the Equal Rights Amendment and the Hayden rider, a controversial ammendment to the ERA which was added just two days before the U.S. Senate vote.

This memorandum outlines the many levels of governmental support, from the president to individual states, for the Equal Rights Amendment in 1950.

This memorandum counters many of the arguments made against the Equal Rights Amendment in 1950.

Thompson writes to O'Mahoney on behalf of the American Nurses' Association, which opposes the Equal Rights Amendment. To her letter she attaches a statement from the Board of Directors of the American Nurses' Association as well as a list of lawyers and legal scholars who oppose the ERA.