I think the best case is ruling DOMA unconstitutional, and clearly stating that the Federal Government has no business defining marriage at all. Leave the matter to the states.
no because now homsexual immigration becomes federal.
as does polygamy immigration.
you go to no borders because of marriage.
>>I think the best case is ruling DOMA unconstitutional, and clearly stating that the Federal Government has no business defining marriage at all. Leave the matter to the states.
I think that this is the correct result as well, and it will piss off the gaysters.
There is always the surprise that the court may rule Stare Decisis over previous 19th century definitions of marriage as woman and man only (in reaction to Mormon polygamy), but very doubtful.
If the SCOTUS would at least leave in place the provision of DOMA that makes it clear that non-gay marriage states don’t have to recognize gay marriages from elsewhere that would be a small win.
Right but however, according to Mark Levin, DOMA has nothing to do with imposing and defining only traditional marriage on the states, but is a federal policy to only recognize man and women marriages at the federal level. It is Federalism. If that's the case, DOMA is not unconstitutional, but the attempt by pro-gay marriage people are trying to impose their laws from California upon other states. The full faith and credit under article 4 has its limits.
The Federal government may say "it recognizes" these unions in Kalifornia's borders or in other states with similar laws but nowhere else.