After researching the issue at some length, my conclusion is that Congress should not consider ratification of the ERA until such time as there is no doubt that 3/4ths of the states have ratified the amendment. Only then would Congress be acting responsibly if it decided that the time limit for ratification (imposed in the 1970s) should be repealed.
What I mean by this is that the rescissions that some states issued to their ratifications should be deemed valid. Thus, supporters of the ERA must either get some of those rescissions rescinded or get enough other states to ratify such that the rescissions become irrelevant.
I reach this conclusion for two reasons. First, ratification of the ERA will not be seen as legitimate if there is an open question about how many states ratified AND a question about whether the ratifications after the expiration of the timeline are valid. Second, there is no consistency whatsoever in saying that states cannot withdraw their yes vote for an amendment but that Congress can change the timeline for ratification. Either both decisions should be final (a plausible view) or neither (equally plausible). Saying that one is final but the other is not cannot, in my view, be justified.
What I have to decide now is whether I’m going to write all of this up in a paper or not. Part of me thinks that I should, but part of me wonders whether there is any point in doing so until another state ratifies. Right now, everybody agrees that 3/4ths of the states have not ratified the ERA. Perhaps that will never change.