Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[quote=HistorianDude;15988701]Absolutely. The further implications of that are two fold:
1. Short of a Constitutional Amendment, the US Congress cannot pass a "defense of marriage act" that limits marriage to one man and one woman.
2. Under the "full faith and credit clause", if one state allows it, all states must recognize it.[/quote]
Yep, they must recognize that in that state they are married.
"While the purpose of that provision was to preserve rights acquired or confirmed under the public acts and judicial proceedings of one state by requiring recognition of their validity in other states, the very nature of the federal union of states, to which are reserved some of the attributes of sovereignty, precludes resort to the full faith and credit clause as the means for compelling a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate."
Absolutely. The further implications of that are two fold:
Yep, they must recognize that in that state they are married.
Obviously someone doesn't understand "full faith and credit".
Article 4 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.
The last time I checked a marriage is a public act.
Obviously someone doesn't understand "full faith and credit".
Article 4 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.
The last time I checked a marriage is a public act.
I think you and Historian are the ones who don't understand it. If this was true, how come ALL states don't have the same marriage laws or restrictions? They would ALL be the same wouldn't they? Some states ban same sex marriage by law where some others don't. Some states allow Domestic partnerships and Civil Unions and some don't. Please explain your logic on how this works.
I don't think that's what Scalia said at all. He said the Constitution does NOT ban sex bias. So, he's saying that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment is being misinterpreted, and that if states want to legislate sex bias, it's up to the states to pass such laws, because the Constitution doesn't address sex bias.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
~~~*~~~
