Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by xÞx, Oct 20, 2009.
Already covered in Article 1, Section 10.
No State shall....pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts...
So Loving v Virginia wasn't even needed- such laws are unconstitutional from the get-go.
And yet DOMA stands...
A state-issued license isn't a right....It's a privilege, by definition.
If gays want to create and consecrate their own common law documents and contracts, there is no law standing in their way.
It is a legally binding contract filed with the state. Many benefits of legal marriage (esp. federal benefits) cannot be gained any other way. To refuse equal recognition, protection, and enforcement of the contracts is a violation of A.1S.10 and the 14th Amendment. Therefore, DOMA and all laws like it are unconstitutional and null and void. Loving v. Virginia provides legal precendent
That doesn't change the fact that licenses are still permission and a privilege.....The recipient of the privilege is beholden and subservient to the grantor.
The real answer to the gay marriage question resides in common law, not statutory law.
Common law marriages have no real weight. DOMA is a federal law denying equal enforcement, protection, and recognition of a legally binding contract and is thus unconstitutional. See Lovingh v. Virginia. Any state laws violate A.1S10 as you yourself pointed out.
Absolute nonsense...Common law contracts are the basis for virtually everything that is American.
Article 1, Section 10 is still the law of the land.
Separate names with a comma.