Posted on 01/14/2013 11:19:28 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas cracked a joke about Yale law students during oral arguments today. He’s famous for his restraint and reticence on the bench. It’s been nearly seven years since he asked any questions — and every last liberal on Twitter is making sure you know it.
That doesn't make the subject matter a federal issue. It only means upholding the full faith and credit of the state from which its citizen(s) journey to another state.
The "full faith and credit" clause gives Congress substantial authority to determine the effect of one state's actions in another state.
OK. Somebody who speaks Twitter tell us what Justice Thomas said. All I saw on the site was gibberish.
But the clause DOESN'T give Congress FEDERAL power over the SUBJECT MATTER itself. The only subject matter this gives Congress power over is the enforcement of a state to recognize a individual's rights from his home state. The subject matter itself remains a states' issue.
If a state wants to declare that it recognizes a man's "marriage" to five dogs, a mule, a tractor, and the number 23, the federal government should have no authority to stop the state from doing so, but I would suggest that the federal government would be fully within its authority to preemptively specify that the sole obligation of any other state will be to, upon request and payment of such fee as the other state shall specify, not to exceed $1,000,000, give the requestor a sheet of paper bearing the words "The state of ____ recognizes that the state of ____ has declared ____ to be married to ___ [, ___, ___, and ___], for whatever that's worth."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.