Massachusetts SJC rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional - Page 2

[Potty Diva]

Oh check this out:

Have you heard of this:

Article IV.
Section. 1.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of
every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.


This means that if Mass makes gay marriages legal, all other states must recognize it :LOL Ha-HA!!

FACE!


Of course if a state has a strong moral objection to it, they can refuse to acknowledge it.

[Marlena]

Not so, PottyDiva. As I mentioned in an earlier post, there is a long history in the US of states refusing to recognize what certain other states do in the area of family law, provided they have a "good reason," so to speak, for doing so, and of those refusals being upheld in court. If I recall correctly, when a marriage is contrary to the law of the state in which the parties are domiciled, and where it significantly offends public policy, then a state may be justified in refusing to recognize it. And the "Defense of Marriage" Act certainly adds support for a state that refuses to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex.

Of course, the area is more complex than just this, and I've also not looked at this area of the law in any detail in a very long time.

[Potty Diva]

Marlena~ Did you completely miss my last sentencee or what? :LOL

[Marlena]

Nope. But in the context of the earlier part of your post, it was very hard to tell what you intended.

[3boys4us]

I am happy to see that the ban is considered unconstitutional but perhaps you lawyers can explaint to me what exactly what a federal law on the defination of marriage will do? Don't states have a right not to enforce or overrule laws part. regarding civil rights?

How would a federal law work on the civil unions of VT for instance?

In the event that federal law is passed couldn't some couples use for the same reason they sued in MA?

Isn't Mr. Romney mormon? He must be very upset.

[RowansDad]

Rene:

Indeed, Gov. Mitt's a Mormon and PO'd with the decision but is willing to work with the Legislature in carving out law recognizing civil unions, rather than 'marriage', for same-sex couples:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/20/gay.marriage.ap/

That'll lead to more litigation here in the Commonwealth because the plaintiff's (and most legal experts) believe the SJC's opinion is inregards 'marriage' and does't leave much wiggle room.

Gotta get back to work but this link may help address your other questions: http://www.masslaw.com/goodridge1.cfm

In particular:

"If a gay couple gets married in Massachusetts and moves to another state, does the other state have to recognize the marriage?

This question will be subject to many lawsuits. Approximately one-half [actually, 37] of the states in the United States have enacted a version of a statute known as the "Defense of Marriage Act." These laws vary in their wording but essentially say that say the state doesn't have to recognize a marriage entered into elsewhere between same-sex couples. However, it's certain that these statutes are going to be challenged under the U.S. Constitution's Full Faith & Credit Clause and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court would have to decide whether they are constitutional. In states that don't have "Defense of Marriage Act" laws, the expectation is that same-sex marriages will likely have to be recognized, though litigation is a certainty."

EDITED to purge some goofy 'smilie' that somehow got included.

[Arduinna]

Has anyone read the Slate opinion on how to sell gay marriage to the conservatives??

http://slate.msn.com/id/2091428/

What do you guys think?

[Artisan]

Originally posted by 3boys4us
I am happy to see that the ban is considered unconstitutional but perhaps you lawyers can explaint to me what exactly what a federal law on the defination of marriage will do? Don't states have a right not to enforce or overrule laws part. regarding civil rights?

How would a federal law work on the civil unions of VT for instance?

In the event that federal law is passed couldn't some couples use for the same reason they sued in MA?

Isn't Mr. Romney mormon? He must be very upset.

No, states do NOT have the right to pick and choose their enforcement of federal laws. According the the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, the Constitution and the federal government are supreme over the states in all cases. If a federal law is passed the contradicts a state law, the state must enforce the federal law.

Sorry, just the government teacher in me coming out. She's leaving now.