Defense of Marriage Act: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session, on H.R. 3396, Defense of Marriage Act, May 15, 1996
United States, United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1996 - Gay couples - 243 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
adopted allowed Amendment American answer argument authority believe benefits bill BIRCH CANADY Chairman choice civil concern CONGRESS THE LIBRARY Constitution continuing couples created credit clause decide decision Defense define definition denied determine effect equal exception fact faith and credit federal government federal law follows FRANK full faith gay and lesbian give going ground Hawaii hearing heterosexual homosexuality House human important INGLIS institution interest issue judges judgment judicial legislation legislature lesbian LIBRARY OF CONGRESS marry matter mean Michigan nature passed person political position prepared proceedings prohibited protection provides public policy question reason recognition recognize records regarding relations relationships Representative respect responsibility RESS rule same-sex marriage SEKULOW sexual simply society statement statute Supreme Court talking tell Thank things understand unions United valid woman
Page 222 - Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought...
Page 111 - It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.
Page 147 - Such Acts, records and judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken.
Page 236 - No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
Page 14 - Full Faith and Credit— The Lawyer's Clause of the Constitution,
Page 239 - In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.'.
Page 19 - Since the classification here touches on the fundamental right of interstate movement, its constitutionality must be judged by the stricter standard of whether it promotes a compelling state interest.
Page 182 - Congress has not prescribed, as it may under the constitutional provision, we think the conclusion is unavoidable that the full faith and credit clause does not require one state to substitute for its own statute, applicable to persons and events within it, the conflicting statute of another state, even though that statute is of controlling force in the courts of the state of its enactment with respect to the same persons and events.
Page 111 - So if a law be in opposition to the constitution, if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law disregarding the constitution, or conformably to the constitution disregarding the law, the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.