[Verginius Rufus]

I think what is at issue is the status of the church performing the marriage (if the Palins were married in a church service rather than by a judge), regardless of Todd Palin’s baptism (I assume he was baptized). But they are saying the marriage is “prohibited” which isn’t quite the same as saying that it is invalid.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

Yeah, reading the subsequent canons recognized the issue. The Church views membership as something that is not easily tossed-off, as a result, for its members it has oversight. But as I think someone else said, if they left the Church, they probably don’t care what the Church says after all.

[Campion]

But they are saying the marriage is "prohibited" which isn't quite the same as saying that it is invalid.

I'm pretty sure it is in this case.

("Prohibited" is slightly odd terminology, though.)