Reply #30: Yes, "Full Faith & Credit Clause": It's why the Defense of Marriage Act is probably unconstitutional

[HamdenRice]

It's not a normal federal law. It's the U.S. Constitution. The "Full faith and credit clause" says:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

In other words, things like birth certificates, court judgments, divorces and so on (public Acts and Records) carried out by one state are enforceable and recognizable in any other state.

So if Connecticut allows gay marriage, a gay couple married in Connecticut that moves, say to Alabama a state that doesn't doesn't itself grant gay marriage, Alabama would have to, according to the constitution, recognize the Connecticut marriage.

The DOMA says that no state has to recognize the same sex marriage of another state. This seems to be clearly unconstitutional, but it hasn't been tested in the Supreme Court.

This is why if

(1) one state grants gay marriage, (2) a gay couple married in that state moves to some other state that uses DOMA not to recognize it, (3) the couple tests the second state's refusal to recognize their marriage, (4) the couple takes the case to the Supreme Court and wins,

then basically the entire gay marriage debate would be over.

It's my guess that this is something that Democratic politicians assume is going to happen and why they will not expend much political capital on the issue. It is likely to be solved in the Supreme Court anyway.