With parts of DOMA recently being struck down, I'm curious as to what people think about section 2:
Defense of Marriage Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNo State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
To me, this seems to be in violation of the full Faith and Credit Clause of the US constitution Full Faith and Credit Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So the poll Question is simple:Full faith and credit ought to be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings, of every other state; and the legislature shall, by general laws, prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings, shall be proved, and the effect which judgments, obtained in one state, shall have in another.
Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause mean that an Anti-SSM state must recognize a SSM form another state, constitutionally?
Yes, it is unconstitutional for a state to withhold recognition of a SSM as per the FFaC clause
No, it is not unconstitutional for a state to withhold recognition of a SSM as per the FFaC clause