I've been looking into the topic of "jurisdiction stripping". Congress is attempting to pass a law (Marriage Protection Act) forbidding the federal court system from hearing cases on the validity of gay marriage. In general, though federal judges don't encourage it, congress does have the power to add or remove topics from the jurisdiction of federal courts.
However, the issue is unlikely to come up through the courts on those grounds. As our presidential candidates are at pains to note, marriage is historically a state issue and the states need to decide for themselves (this fact allows candidates to take whatever position on gay marriage they want without having to back it up with action -- the president has no power to set marriage laws)
Still, thanks to the full faith & credit clause of the constitution, gay marriage may not be a federal issue but it's certainly a national issue. As soon as ONE STATE fully legalizes it (eg Massachusetts has authorized it, but it's still in the midst of legal & state constitutional challenges) those marriages will have to accepted by all the other states as legit under the FF&C clause.
The net effect is gay marriage will be legal everywhere, even if marriage licenses are not available everywhere. Even if many states pass laws preventing gay marriage from originating in that state, FF&C will let them in through the side door.
Once legislatures figure that out, they will run to amend their laws to close the FF&C loophole, by saying "we accept FF&C except for gay marriage". And there is the federal constitutional issue.
Historically the supreme court has not been generous to states attempting to trim federally-granted constitutional rights down to state parameters. It has also not been generous to laws that discriminate, which goes back to the significance of the Lawrence v Texas decision last year, which struck down the Texas anti-sodomy laws. What the court was really saying is "you can't make laws that selectively target gays".
Eventually the Supreme Court will probably hear a case involving an FF&C restriction that targets gays and if they apply Lawrence as precedent, it'll be a real dust-up on the bench.
08 Oct 04
Interesting. Our church council just gave the go ahead to our pastor to NOT discriminate in conducting marriage ceremonies, and to screen any couple and every couple in the same way. So, in essence, we are endorsing gay marriage. We are pleased at their decision.
Really, it would be best if the religious portion of a ceremony was just that......and didn't also complete a legal proceeding....simply a blessing, if you will. Still, since it is what it is, we are in support.