|
Or, Why Orrin Hatch is Full of Shit.
The Massachussets ruling did not "force" same-sex marriage on any other state. There are three "choice-of-law" doctrines for handling the obligations of the Full Faith and Credit Clause, specifically when dealing with marriage contracts.
The first, and most general, is the norm of respect. This means that a marriage is treated as valid if it was valid where it was celebrated. This is the doctrine applied to most marriages.
The second, and the crucial one here, is the norm of good faith. This means that a marriage may be held as invalid if the couple in question went to another state solely to avoid the restrictions in their home state.
The third (of questionable Constitutional stature) is the norm of "hewing to the mainstream," also known as the public policy exception. Under this norm, an act of another State may be ignored if it is against some fundamental principle of justice within the State in question.
Under existing choice-of-law doctrines, no new law is required to prevent same-sex marriage from spreading beyond those states which have approved it through whatever means their respective Constitutions allows. If a same-sex couple goes to another state simply to avoid the restrictions in their home state, the home state is under no obligation under the United States Constitution to honor that marriage.
Additionally, a state may refuse to honor any sort of same-sex marriage if it is odious to some public policy perogative of the highest order; a "fundamental principle of justice." Basically, if a State Constitution bars recognition of same-sex marriages, the State would be under no obligation to honor the marriage - this is, of course, assuming that you accept the public policy exception as valid under the United States Constitution.
The problem with DOMA (well, not the only problem, but one of them) is that it glosses over an important aspect of these exceptions - it allows all states to apply them, not just the state with the most significant interest in the people in question. For instance, under choice-of-law doctrine minus DOMA, if a same-sex married couple legally married in Massachussets were to pass through a state which has a clause in their Constitution banning the recognition of same-sex marriages, the State would still be obliged to recognize the marriage, since they are not the State with the most significant relationship to the spouses. After DOMA, they still may refuse to recognize the marriage.
So, when you hear this meme that "same-sex marriage is being forced on the rest of the states" - call the liars and fools on it, and point out how wrong they are.
|