Posted on 09/18/2014 11:39:41 AM PDT by massmike
Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant is intervening in a case involving a woman who wants the state to recognize her same-sex marriage in order to grant a divorce.
The Republican governor, represented by Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, is opposing Lauren Czekala-Chatham's appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court.
The women married in San Francisco in 2008 and bought a house in Mississippi before separating in 2010. They could divorce in California, but Czekala-Chatham says she shouldn't be treated differently than straight couples. Melancon objected to the divorce but later agreed to a binding settlement splitting the couple's property even though the divorce was denied.
It's possible the state high court could await guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court. Wesley Hisaw, Czekala-Chatham's lawyer, told The Associated Press Wednesday that the nation's high court may agree to hear Utah's appeal of a ruling striking down that state's ban on gay marriage.
He argues that the U.S. Constitution requires Mississippi to recognize a legal California marriage, despite another still-standing part of the Defense of Marriage Act that grants states an exemption from such recognition. He also argues that equal protection requirements of the 14th Amendment require recognition.
Attorney General Jim Hood, in his response, said the Supreme Court ruling doesn't void Mississippi's gay marriage ban, although 10 lower courts have cited it in overturning state bans.
"The United States Supreme Court's ... decision did not create any new right to enter into same-sex marriage or to require states to recognize same-sex marriages authorized in other jurisdictions," Hood's office wrote.
Bryant argues in part that Mississippi's ban should be upheld because states should be allowed to make their own rules.
(Excerpt) Read more at sunherald.com ...
The situation calls out for Solomon’s Sword.
I think all marriages should be by contract, spelling terms and conditions, as well how dissolution will be handled.
Robustly agree!
Or Sodom's fire.....
They want the state to recognize their marriage so that they can get a divorce. So much for the myth that the gay marriage battle is about love.
Slicing and roasting on the sin grill.
Hey, Bryant, how about intervening in that corrupt farce of a Senate primary and demand Thad the Cad get off the ballot ?
How about states where the husband pays alimony to his wife? I think I see onfusion on the horizon...
The state doesn’t believe they are married (because they are not), so what’s the point in trying to convince the state to accept their so-called divorce [yes, I’m pretending that this isn’t just a game to force recognition of their arrangement as if it was a real marriage]? Why would a sane person want to pay a divorce lawyer in order to get formal state recognition of the status that the state already recognizes? The state doesn’t think they are married, and they don’t want to be married, so no one other than a drama queen would think this was a problem that required a judge and lawyers.
But I thought this was a committed relationship, that needed an upgrade? Really? I guess sone relationships aren’t like the movies. Guess they have the same roblems they despise in the rest of us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.