Remember that DOMA has two operational sections. One being a gender-based exemption for recognition of Civil Marriage between States (not a requirement, but an exemption). The second being an imposition on gender-based recognition of Civil Marriage at the Federal level.
The authority of Congress to determine the meaning of public acts between the States is specifically noted in the "Full Faith & Credit Clause" (Article IV Section 1). Therefore Congress exercising is expressly delineated authority is not, in an of itself, a violation of the Constitution. So the act would not be unConstitutional under FF&C, however it may be unConstitutional based on other limiting factors. Such factors could be the gender-based limitation under Due Process and Equal Protection when there is no compelling government interest in such a gender-based law.
I point out that the law is gender-based because no laws restricting Civil Marriage (or it's recognition) are based on sexual orientation, the language of the law(s) are gender-based.
IMHO - I much better version of DOMA would be to repeal the current one and replace it with one that exempts States from recognizing ANY Civil Marriage from outside the State that conflicts with it's own internal laws and then the Federal government should recognize ALL legal Civil Marriages based on legal residency of the participants. Butting the purview of Civil Marriage back where it belongs with the States.
>>>>
Last edited:
