Posted on 11/24/2006 6:30:32 AM PST by presidio9
A lesbian couple married in Massachusetts has filed for divorce in Rhode Island, setting up a legal conundrum for judges in a state where the laws are silent on the legality of same-sex marriage. Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston of Providence were married after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court legalized gay marriage. Chambers' attorney, Louis Pulner, said Wednesday the couple had irreconcilable differences, and filed for divorce Oct. 23 in Rhode Island family court.
Family Court Chief Judge Jeremiah Jeremiah Jr. said he believed it was the filing for a same-sex divorce in Rhode Island. He has not yet decided whether the court has jurisdiction. A preliminary hearing was scheduled for Dec. 5.
In 2004, Massachusetts became the only state to allow same-sex couples to marry after the state Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to ban it.
Until recently, it was up in the air whether couples from out of state could marry in Massachusetts. In September, a Massachusetts judge decided that nothing in Rhode Island law specifically bans gay marriage and said couples from the Ocean State could legally marry there.
However, Rhode Island has not taken any action to recognize same-sex unions made in Massachusetts. State Attorney General Patrick Lynch has said it is a matter for the courts and legislature to decide.
"Now the ultimate question is whether the state will recognize or determine whether it has jurisdiction to handle an out-of-state divorce when we don't have any case law that accepts or rejects same-sex marriage," Pulner said.
Courts nationwide could soon find themselves facing similar dilemmas, especially as more and more same-sex couples are married in Massachusetts, said Janet Halley, a professor at Harvard Law School who researches the topic. Marital status
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Now I am totally confused. If they are lesbians, why do they need to wear a conundrum?
If they could go there to get married then send them back to Taxachussets to get the divorce.
Oh, golly gee. Who gets the house, the car, the kids?? Certainly they conceived children. Gays are like all normal couples aren't they? They must have conceived children. /sarcasm still on.
ping
Lesbians split?
Given the short time span involved in the case, what do you want to bet that the gal pals are part of the LGBT activist network and were "recruited" for their marriage-in-Massachusettes divorce-out-of-state project, to, again use the courts not the people and our democracy, to get the laws beyond Massachusettes changed?
Have no fear. Jeremiah Jeremiah Junior will figure it all out.
Actually, the article goes on to discuss that:
Nancy Palmisciano, an attorney for Ormiston, said she wasn't using the case to force Rhode Island to amend its marriage laws.
"We're not asking for a marriage license. We're past that," she said. "We're not asking for anything but a divorce."
So you see, this is nothing more than a beautiful love story gone wrong. A tragedy, really. These women are victims, not activists. After all, their lawyer says so. They're not trying to change any laws. Even if no part of Rhode Island is more than half an hour outside of Massachusetts, and doing it this way will obviously be a much bigger hassle for them. Perish the thought!
I heard they are divorcing on the grounds of incompatible couplers.
Not only that, I'm sure he'll treat the whole situation with all the sensitivity that it deserves. Might even take a trip over to one of the "Low Countries" to see how they handle these things.
So the girls were married for two whole years?
Yeah, that gay marriage thing is really working well. /sarcasm
This is simple. They should be told that as far as Rhode Island is concerned, they are not married so there is no need to divorce. They can break up any way they see fit.
Might of worked except that just about every state governeror ducked the whole issue two years ago by saying "but of course, I will respect the laws of other states." In other words, you can't marry your own sex here, but if another state will do it, that counts."
This might be something that will be tried in various states, just to see how the states play along with 'granting' divorces to gay couples who married in Massachusetts. Then, if a state takes the marriage seriously, another legal challenge can be mounted based on a state's handling of the divorce.
IMHO....this whole thing is just 'thilly'
sarc/off
More important, who gets the carpet?
This is a SERIOUS legal manuver by the homosexual lobby.
They tried this with Vermont Civil unions in GA, TX, FL and CT.
In order to be divorced the marriage must first be LEGALLY recognized by the court.
THEN then court must accept jurisdiciton over the subject matter.
If RI accepts this divorce case then legally RI has recognized homosexual marriages.
The FULL faith and credit wall is broken.
PEOPLE FOCUS ON WHETHER A NON-HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE STATE RECOGNIZES THIS DIVORCE FOR PURPOSES OF LEGAL JURISDICTION.
Recognition of the divorce is recognition of the marriage.
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.