MPA Update
A sub-committee of the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee on Wednesday passed that proposed Constitutional amendment under which same-sex marriages would be banned nationwide. The vote was 5-4, along party lines, allowing the measure to proceed to the full Judiciary Committee.
The deciding vote in favor of the amendment was cast by . . . . yeah, you guessed it: Arlen Specter. He’ll apparently vote against the bill, but supported its full consideration by the Judiciary Committee and then the Chamber at large.
Looking ahead, and regarding the individual states, seeing 38 of them ratify would appear quite likely. Merely within the past 12 months, voters in “blue states” such as Oregon and Michigan passed state constitutional bans against same-sex marriages by large majorities. If Oregon and Michigan are voting that way, then the writing would be on the wall for all state assemblies and state senates, no?
The real issue would appear to be whether the 2/3 margin in Congress can be obtained.
That should be interesting.
What particularly will be interesting, IMO, is seeing the ways in which liberal Democrats who’ve lied to their constituents to get elected — e.g., Tim Johnson of S.D., Mary Landrieu of LA, Max Baucus of MT, Kent Conrad of N.D., Mark Pryor of Ark., etc. — will attempt to stay on both sides of the fence.
* * *
FWIW, I don’t care whether State A wants to allow gays to marry. My only real concern — purely a legalistic one — is the potential impact of the full faith and credit clause on that scenario. I don’t think we want a situation where gays or a surviving gay spouse married in Massachusetts can try to obtain recognition of that marriage in Georgia (by virtue of a will or intestate contest or other litigation involving state property/succession rights). Legal chaos.
Ultimately, however, I would much prefer the issue be handled state-by-state. But if 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states want the MPA, that’ll be that.
BTW: Here’s the Asocialist Press’ version of events.
Subscribe to blog feed.