“Does the state have to recognize that marriage? If they do not, is that a violation of the equal protection clause?”
This is why it’s not up to the states. The feds jurisdiction is to maintain the definition of marriage, so that this issue doesn’t crop up.
This is why Utah had to accept the fed’s rule against polygamy before they could become a state.
If it were up to the states, then there really is no reason why they would be banned from endorsing polygamy, but this was not the case.
so mass rules the state has the right to overule the fed.
in calif the court might rule the fed overturns the state.
This is why we need the federal marriage amendment.
I always thought it was a state's right, and I don't agree with bootstrapping everything to the commerce clause either. Assume for a minute that it is a state's right. How could it be handled without the Fed?
The states can have bilateral arrangements regarding marriage recognition, or even a universal code that they can sign onto or something like that. The feds don't have to be involved necessarily.
Personally, I would like to see lots of the Federal stuff thrown out the window and put back in the state's hands. I like the 10th amendment, and I think repeal of the 17th might be a good thing too.
Our nat’l congress critters ignore what is good for the states and the people and I for one am sick of it.