This is a good ruling. How do you enforce this on cohabitating individuals? Will you go and do DNA tests on children? What about if the man involved is sterile?
The state regulates marriage for better or worse, but cohabitating?
Before deciding this is a victory for human liberty, you might want to look into the history of the FLDS Church. The abuse of women and children associated with the practice, as opposed to the theory, of polygamy is what this law was intended to prevent.
I don’t have an answer as to how to effectively deal with this issue, given our commitment to freedom of religion. But anything that encourages the survival and spread of an inherently abusive system is not a good thing.
I agree. I oppose polygamy, and the part of the law outlawing polygamy was left intact.
My reading of part of the law that was struck down is that it was expansive enough to ban “Threes Company” (if anyone actually remembers that show) situations where men and some share residences but are platonic roomates.
I’m also reminded of the old DC law that banned more than three (I think) unrelated women from sharing a residence by defining such as a Brothel.
So a reasonable ruling, even if the case was brought by a polygamist trying to advance his own cause.