tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5101327010852868774.post8055975108782385333..comments2023-06-19T09:24:07.184-04:00Comments on Schmitz Blitz: Family Values Victory in the 10th CircuitElizabeth Schmitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13718548132510388920noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5101327010852868774.post-82450944193974676702007-08-07T08:15:00.000-04:002007-08-07T08:15:00.000-04:00Elizabeth, I don't blame you for being suspicious ...Elizabeth, I don't blame you for being suspicious of the Tenth Circuit's motives in making reference to the distinction between recognition of judgments and recognition of laws. But that distinction has been a fundamental part of full faith and credit law for decades--really from the time of the first Congress in 1789.<BR/><BR/>The consensus among legal scholars, progressive as well as conservative, is that the Full Faith and Credit Clause does not, except in exceedingly rare situations, require one state to recognize marriages performed in another state. But you have to be careful, because there are both pro-gay and anti-gay advocates who have been claiming otherwise--without any solid legal foundation--for years. Evan Wolfson is one on the pro-gay side; Robert Bork is one on the anti-gay side. (Anti-gay advocates make the argument as a scare tactic to make the Federal Marriage Amendment seem necessary.)<BR/><BR/>Stephen Clark<BR/>Professor, Albany Law SchoolAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com