1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Calif. lawmakers: Repeal federal marriage law

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by Dan82, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. Dan82

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicago IL
    http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15870662

     
  2. mydogstewie

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wait, a 22-12 senate vote? Is that good?
     
  3. Alex19

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    1,157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    i do believe so.
     
  4. Emberstone

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    it is very good. it is nearly a two thirds majority.
     
  5. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    Nice gesture. But sadly the only people that see these resolutions Legislatures send to Congress are the janitors that empty the garbage cans on Capitol Hill. Members don't pay them any attention.
     
  6. Revan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,850
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    So if the DOMA does get repealed what does this mean? Like I've always wondered, is it like the only thing that's so far allowing states to prevent same-sex marriages legally?
     
  7. Emberstone

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    it prevents gay couples from having fully legal rights granted to heterosexual couples. it doesnt mean states can't have gay marriage. clinton signed it to appease the fundementalist far right fear based hate control fringes.
     
  8. gattsuru

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    There are 25 Democratic and 14 Republican Californian State Senators, with one vacancy. Not an overwhelming victory, but of the folk there, not bad.
    There are two major parts to DOMA. One part prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages itself: this primarily prevents government spousal benefits and certain tax forms from being available to those who are married in a state that recognizes their marriage. Overturning that would allow (and likely result in) those being made available, but would not necessarily mean anything regarding whether you could get married in your particular state.

    The other part states that no state (or territory or possession or Indian tribe) is required to recognize a same-sex marriage from a different state (or territory, or possession or Indian tribe). From a strictly textual interpretation of the Constitution, this doesn't mean much : the Full Faith and Credit Clause says that regardless of what Congress does, that every political subdivision must recognize certain types of records from other political subdivisions. In practice, the Supreme Court has been highly hands-off on the matter, and even things like driver's licenses are recognized from one state to the next through separate agreements, rather than through Constitutional interpretation. Making a Full Faith and Credit Clause challenge to get same-sex marriages (or pretty much any act other than a finding of guilt in a court of law) from one jurisdiction recognized in another jurisdiction requires jumping through a number of hoops. One of those hoops is to successfully deflect an exception for "public policy" reasons. DOMA makes that exception very easy to argue in court, although not a sure case. Even if this part of DOMA were overturned, the courts may still not require out-of-state same-sex marriages to be recognized. But it'd be a less open-and-shut case.