Comments on: Massachusetts Says Federal Marriage Law Unconstitutional

By: Monorprise

Monorprise — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:52:26 +0000

Read 2nd line of the clause: Article. IV.: Section. 1:
" And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
"

By: Anti

Anti — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 17:37:33 +0000

Actually, to not recognize a marriage performed in another state would be unconstitutional under the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. The whole reason DOMA exists is to attempt to thwart that clause, but you would really need an amendment for that.

By: Massachusetts Says Federal Marriage Law Unconstitutional | Tenth … · Staringfrog.com

Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:36:00 +0000

[...] See the original post: Massachusetts Says Federal Marriage Law Unconstitutional | Tenth … [...]

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:21:19 +0000

If she is trying to force other states to recognize, that's a bad thing and unconstitutional. I definitely am opposed to that. I would challenge, however, that the federal government has no authority to define marriage – as this is something not in the purview of the federal government in any way. Part of the act explicitly does that…

By: Monorprise

Monorprise — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:08:47 +0000

What federal law are we talking about? If its the defense of marriage act which says states don't have to recognized the "gay marrages" preformed in other states?

Because thats under 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.
"

A marriage licensee being a public record.

If she is however talking about The Federal tax and otherwise programs relating to marriage, then you she should have exactly the same case discriminatory case on a lot of other Federal tax and program issues. which i would agree is unconstitutional in-mass. But thats challenging the Federal government power to tax and spend money discriminatingly based upon what policy the state has. I can't imagine that being the case.

In either case suspect she is doing nothing more then trying to force all other states to recognized gay marriage using the federal courts. Typical behavior of totalitarian Massachusetts in how she has historically treated/mistreated her sister states in union with her.