[roadcat]

But if the fine print on the marriage license is read, she STILL isn't truthfully legally wed.

I passed by there a couple times around noon while it was going on (I work in downtown SF). Real sick media circus going on.

What I'm wondering is the following. City of SF changed the marriage license to not read "husband and wife", "man and woman", etc. So they are not legally binding documents that the State of California approved. (And SF is breaking the law by using bogus altered official documents.) But what about regular couples who are getting married at this time. Lets say Joe Blow and Ima Lover are a man and woman and want to get married at SF City Hall this week. Is the City of SF using the doctored document, or are they using the offical State document?

If they're using the doctored document for all weddings (probably), then the heterosexual couple may have problems down the road when they are deemed not legally wedded. I believe more lawsuits are forthcoming.

[longtermmemmory]

If the false wedding certificate is used for federal taxes, will the IRS be prosecuting? What is the IRS position? Will the IRS follow DMA?

Will O'Donuts risk jail? or she just keep this a s a PR stunt.

[heleny]

Lets say Joe Blow and Ima Lover are a man and woman and want to get married at SF City Hall this week. Is the City of SF using the doctored document, or are they using the offical State document? If they're using the doctored document for all weddings (probably), then the heterosexual couple may have problems down the road when they are deemed not legally wedded. I believe more lawsuits are forthcoming.

Interesting question. I hope SF gives them the proper papers.

I heard on TV that SF now requires an appointment to get a marriage license, so that there won't be lines out the door. If Ima and Joe want an appointment, do they have the same priority as XX&XX or XY&XY?