Constitutional Question (Either obvious or Arcane)

[cthulu2016]

1) Can states legislate to honor same-sex marriages from other states?

2) Is there any federal constitutional issue raised thereby?

It seems like an obvious Yes and No to me, but the federal interest in relations between states is vast and arcane, so I thought I'd ask.

[morningfog]

1. Yes. No.

DC has done this, I think Hawaii too. Any state that recognizes same-sex marriages entered in their state would likewise recognize those from other states which recognize them.

[porphyrian]

2. A state may pass its own law honoring a law of another state.

I don't believe there is any constitutional issue with this, though there may be things related to a state's law that come into conflict with the US Constitution. However, I believe most state constitutions defer to the US Constitution, so they wouldn't be able to pass (or keep, if it did pass) a law in violation of the US Constitution. States may, and do, pass laws that contradict federal law (such as medical marijuana) as long as they are not unconstitutional. That's my understanding.

[michael811]

3. full faith and credit clause

Would seem to mean that all states have to honor the marriage licenses issued by the other states and that is what doma was about but legislation can't overrule the constitution

[RedSpartan]

4. This is correct.

The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution says that states must honor the laws of other states. That is why. for example, if you were married in, say, New Jersey and moved to California, you were also (in the eyes of the law) considered married in California without having to do it all over again.

DOMA, however, overrides this and says that states do not have to honor same-sex marriages performed in other states. It is unquestionably unconstitutional.

So in answer to your question, states can legislate to honor marriages from other states, but there is no reason to because it is already engrained in the Constitution. There is no problem with doing so, however, since it is consistent with the Constitution anyway.

[HopeHoops]

5. True. DOMA would have to become an amendment to be constitutional.