|
Title: Need some help here Post by: MavsGM on April 19, 2005, 05:14:10 PM Ok, I'm doing my law paper here and needed some help. I know that HornetsGM is in law school.
Question: What happens to the marriage of a Massachusetts gay couple if they move to Louisiana and seek to enforce the marriage legally under full faint and credit? To Florida? My answer to both of them is no the gay couple can't enforce the marriage in both La. and Florida but I'm not really sure. Title: Re: Need some help here Post by: HornetsGM on April 19, 2005, 05:49:24 PM Quote from: MavsGM Ok, I'm doing my law paper here and needed some help. I know that HornetsGM is in law school. Question: What happens to the marriage of a Massachusetts gay couple if they move to Louisiana and seek to enforce the marriage legally under full faint and credit? To Florida? My answer to both of them is no the gay couple can't enforce the marriage in both La. and Florida but I'm not really sure. I think it depends on the laws about gay marriage in LA and FL. If those states have statutes banning gay marriage and a same sex couple seeks to have their marriage (from MA) enforced in those two states, then that creates a conflict between states (b/c of the full faith + credit clause.) The Supreme Court decides conflicts between states. The Supreme Court has to determine, basically, whether it's unfair for the state not to recognize that marriage. I believe that they have to show a state interest in banning gay marriage. I haven't done much of this, but that's my general idea about it. I'm only a 1st year student, and Constitutional Law isn't my strongsuit :) Title: Need some help here Post by: MavsGM on April 19, 2005, 05:54:24 PM Ok, thanx, under full faint and credit I found this:
Quote 81. Marriage It is established rule that marriage which is valid where contracted or solemnized is valid everywhere, unless it is contrary to public policy of forum. Henderson v Henderson (1952) 199 Md 449, 87 A2d 403. Marriage between nonresidents of state, though violative of restrictions of state of forum, is entitled to recognition. Palmer v Palmer (1928) 265 Mass 242, 163 NE 879. Court would give full faith and credit to state court order determining that accused was validly married under state common law even though it was clear that common law marriage was sham to attempt to steal military pay entitlements and that accused and his "wife" selectively presented facts to Family Court judge who did best he could with what he had; court-martial is not proper forum for government attack on state court domestic relations order. United States v Riddle (1994, AFCCA) 41 MJ 673, 1994 CCA LEXIS 78, affd (1996, USCAAF) 1996 CAAF LEXIS 34. Title: Need some help here Post by: HornetsGM on April 19, 2005, 06:12:08 PM I mean, it's a tough question because the Supreme Court hasn't decided whether it's ok or not...
The Supreme Court would probably use a "rational relations" standard if they examined a gay marriage ban arising out of a single state. (This would be when a gay couple challenged a law that did not allow them to marry; not an already married gay couple seeking to have another state recognize their marriage) This is the weakest standard, and basically, it means that any reason that the state gives for banning gay marriage will make the law ok. The state could say, for example, that marriage is in place to encourage men to stick with the kids that they have fathered... This might not seem like a great reason, but it doesn't matter as long as there is any "rational relation" to the law and some state interest... However, the full faith and credit clause gives a gay couple more power, because it heightens the scrutiny that the court uses a little. The state that's looking to ban the marriage has to show a pretty good reason for not recognizing it. This comes into play when the couple is already married in one state and wants another state to recognize the marriage. It's not clear where the Supreme Court is gonna go, and which standard they're going to use, which is why this is a tough question. You might want to check out Lawrence v. Texas (a Supreme Court case), where the court struck down an anti-sodomy law. I know Scalia was really mad about the effects the decision could have on gay marriage... There should be a lot of internet articles about the implications this decision has on gay marriage, and you might be able to get some more info about whether states will have to recognize gay marriages performed in other states... |