Skjellyfetti wrote:Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.
And neither a marriage license or a CCW according to this Law Prof is a "public Act," a "public record" or a "judicial Proceeding". Is he right? Heck if I know. Have to ask one of the lawyers on here.
"......My own research led me to write in a law review article more than a decade ago that the FFCC does not compel marriage recognition by the states, because the marriage itself is not a public Act, a public record, or a judicial Proceeding. The case law on marriage recognition suggests that it is a matter of comity, not of compulsion under the FFCC, and that states have always been free to refuse to recognize marriages that could not have been performed in their own jurisdiction if they concluded that recognizing such marriages would be inconsistent with their state’s public policies, as articulated in statutes, regulations, and state judicial opinions.
Those who argued that Sec. 2 of DOMA, which provides that states are not required to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, was necessary to protect states from being compelled to recognize such marriages, were just plain wrong. In its FFCC jurisprudence, the Supreme Court has never ruled that states are required to recognize marriages from other states. They are required to recognize divorces and adoptions from other states, because in each of those instances there is a "judicial Proceeding"; that is, a divorce or an adoption results from a court order based on a judgement being exercised by a duly authorized judicial officer, so the FFCC literally applies. This has been dramatically confirmed recently by state appellate decisions in Florida and Louisiana holding that adoptions by same-sex couples that were judicially approved in other jurisdictions would be recognized pursuant to the FFCC, regardless of the fact that neither Florida (which bans all adoptions by gay people) nor Louisiana allows same-sex couples to adopt children within their states.
And that, by analogy, explains why in the absence of the proposed gun amendment, states are free to ignore or refuse to recognize permits to carry concealed weapons issued by other states. A permit or license does not come within the FFCC. The permit or license is not a "public Act," a "public record" or a "judicial Proceeding" as those terms are used in the FFCC. My license to practice law in New York does not entitle me to practice law in New Jersey by virtue of the FFCC. The same is true of medical licenses, and other licenses to engage in various professions that are regulated by the state, including teachers licenses. I don't think anybody has ever successfully argued that the public schools of other states are required to honor licenses issued by the NY State Education Department to people who want to be public school teachers in New York. They can if they want to, but the FFCC does not require it, and every state is free to set the educational and other qualifications for licensing public school teachers. And the same is true of marriage licenses. Perhaps this gun debate will help people to understand the marriage recognition issue a bit better......"
http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leo ... lause.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And this guy is a homo, by the way.
