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.
What rights? As it stands many states have common law marriages. Two people cohabitate for a certain amount of time and they are considered married under the law.
I am pretty sure illegals can get married in all 50 states now. People can come from a foreign county and get married here. Americans get married in foreign countries all the time. I don't believe one's legal status has any baring on getting a marriage license. Feel free to show me different.
I am sure now people here illegally get married every day in California and elsewhere. I am not sure where you are getting that is not the case now.
People can certainly come into the US for a "destination wedding" on a valid travel visa. I don't know whether they bring a license with them for the ceremony, or whether they're considered to be "legally married in the state of VA" for example.
In NC, you have to provide a valid SS# or a notarized statement why not, and they must have a valid ID/birth certificate. Items which illegals do not have (other than a few who may have brought a birth certificate with them). And you can't get a notarized statement without valid ID.
Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) last week voted against federal legislation that would require states to recognize same-sex marriages. Three days later, the congressman attended his son’s same-sex wedding.
“Congressman and Mrs. Thompson were thrilled to attend and celebrate their son’s marriage on Friday night as he began this new chapter in his life. The Thompsons are very happy to welcome their new son-in-law into their family,” Thompson’s press secretary, Maddison Stone, told The Washington Post late Monday in an email.
With my own time constraints I read what Jordan said. He just thinks the bill is unnecessary and poltical. Justice Thomas spooked the left with his comments. No he did not call for them to be overturned but wanted to consider that possibility. And if the same standard is used same sex marriage would go down like R v W. That is why this bill came up now. If the dems lose control of the house this bill won't have a chance in the future. And sure its political theater also.
Do you think all those Dems in the House and Senate that are attorneys can read and understand what Thomas wrote?
I think they can, and I think it's ALL political theater. They've made the decision that performance theater now, in 1 day (this bill) to 7 days (Contraceptive Bill) , is more important than any other issue they face. Actions which ARE legal today don't need to be addressed right now.
It's the untwisted version of what Mitch McConnell said about Federal abortion rights or bans - nothing is going to happen in a Senate done in a polarized fashion based upon the numbers, so any matter like this will fall to the states.
Neither party will have 60 Senate seats unless some Dems also switch parties. So until 2024, nobody should expect controversial, polarizing, pure-partisan legislation to pass.
That's the simple definition of 95% of what has passed the House since 2018.
The government should stay out of all marriages. People should just sign a contract.
But that's not how it's done. When it's done like that across the board, then it will be equitable. As long as there is marriage, everyone should have that right whether gay or straight.
I am pretty sure illegals can get married in all 50 states now. People can come from a foreign county and get married here. Americans get married in foreign countries all the time. I don't believe one's legal status has any baring on getting a marriage license. Feel free to show me different.
I am sure now people here illegally get married every day in California and elsewhere. I am not sure where you are getting that is not the case now.
this is one law firm's take on it. I don't see anywhere that 2 illegals can get married.
An illegal can marry a citizen or even a lawful permanent resident (green card holder) after they jump through a bunch of hoops, and assuming they've been here 6 months they have to leave the country anyway for 3+ years.
Every state I've looked up requires some form of valid ID. And not every state will issue a valid ID to illegal immigrants
Texas will NOT issue an ID for someone unlawfully present. So why should Texas or ANY other state abide by CA's rules regarding marriage for say illegals?
And the real point is, why not cover this ("Legal Citizens or Lawful Permanent Resident") in the Bill's language, rather than try and jam through without compromise or consideration in a day?
Both parties must be at least 18 years old, unless specific requirements for minors are met. The parties cannot be more closely related than first cousins, and cannot be double first cousins (for instance, the children of two sisters who married two brothers).
Minors ages 16 and 17 must file with the Register of Deeds a written consent to the marriage signed by a parent with sole or joint legal custody, or by a person, agency, or institution that has legal custody of the minor or is serving as the minor’s legal guardian.
Minors ages 14 and 15 must file a court action if they wish to marry. This option is available only in cases of pregnancy or teenage parenthood. A guardian ad litem must be appointed to give an opinion on whether the marriage is in the best interest of the 14- or 15-year-old, and the court must also consider the opinions of his or her parents. The judge must decide if the minor is ready for the responsibilities of marriage.
So what if a state disagreed with me marrying my first cousin?
What if they disagreed with recognizing the marriage of 16 years old?
What if a state didn't require any restrictions (like parental consent) for 15 year olds? Those couples must be recognized by all the other states?
Thinking something and thinking something should have the force of government or law behind it is NOT the same thing!
I think people should be polite...I do not think it should be a legal requirement...that would open up a myriad of issues and definitions!
That was an oversimplification...or is it? We are seeing a similar thing with certain socialist leaning countries trying to enforce pronouns with law!
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.
