He can't change RI law. What he's saying is that *he* interprets the RI law to mean that marriage is not restricted to one man and one woman. That means that the MA law saying that a marriage is not recognized in Massachusetts if it's not recognized in another state, is not valid.
So it sounds like either (a) they can "claim" they get married in RI and MA will recognize it, or (b) they can just get married in MA and MA will recognize it. Either way, it's not a legal Rhode Island marriage...yet.
What this does, however, is give the activists a hammer to use on the Rhode Island judiciary. They can now go back there and say, "look, we married in Massachusetts and it's legal there, so therefore you must extend full faith and credit to us and recognize our marriage here in Rhode Island."
I've never been entirely comfortable with a Constitutional amendment about marriage. It seems so bloody OBVIOUS that marriage is one man and one woman, that it isn't the sort of thing that needs to be defined in a state or the Federal constitution. But uncontrolled judicial activism like this is leaving us no choice. The amendment process seems to be the only way to put some fetters on these radicals, because our legislators don't show the spines or the cojones to stop them any other way.
}:-)4
It's not saying that the Massachusetts law is invalid. What he's saying is that the Massachusetts law is valid, that it permits an out of state couple to be married in Massachusetts if their marriage is not forbidden in their home state, and that in his opinion same-sex marriage is not forbidden in Rhode Island.
Now, when these two get back to Rhode Island, they'll likely be turned down when they seek to get their marriage recognized there. And then they'll appeal, and it'll go to the Supremes, and they'll have to figure out whether and how to apply the "Full Faith and Credit" clause in the Constitution with regards to this.
Now, that clause says that Congress has the power to regulate how public acts of one state will apply in another with appropriate legislation. And the Congress has, in fact, passed a law saying that on a Federal basis, marriage is only valid between a man and a woman. So the Supremes could say that that Congress has passed the appropriate law for this circumstance, and that therefore Rhode Island doesn't need to recognize this "marriage". We'll see.