US Supreme Court asked to decide legal battle between states over same-sex unions

Liberty Counsel may be playing with fire here. I could see this case backfiring.

 

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is the commonly-used name of a federal law of the United States that is officially known as Pub. L. No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419 (Sept. 21, 1996) and codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law has two effects.

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need recognize a marriage between persons of the same sex, even if the marriage was concluded or recognized in another state.
2. The Federal Government may not recognize same-sex or polygamous marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives, and was signed by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

Source: Wikipedia

 

Isn't this why a federal marriage amendment is at least relevant, if not important? Of course, leave it to some one to say that the Constitution can be declared unconsitutional.

 

I'd think that an amendment is the only real way to proscribe gay marriage. If I were a justice, I would have to give serious consideration to the "full faith and credit" clause in the Constitution.
Article IV

Section 1. 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.



As a strict constructionist, I'd be hard-pressed to allow the DOMA to stand. While I may agree with the DOMA's intent, I'm not so certain that the DOMA fits in to the provisions of Article IV.