Hostage wrote:
“If Texas can follow Alabama and exit the business of issuing marriage licenses, then homosexuals have nothing in Texas to attack with respect to marriage, and this in turn would render the SCOTUS ruling a hollow victory.”
Texas still has common-law marriage.
No need for a license.
A man and a woman can get married in church, say to friends and family and colleagues that they are married, and live together (I think there is a time period involved) and they are considered married.
And legal documents (e.g. trusts) can be drawn up and mention that status.
State involvement in marriage, before the same-sex distraction, had been evolving to a concern that children born should have registered birth certificates with a father and mother’s name on it so that in the event of child abandonment, the state would have a recourse to the child becoming a ward of the state.
Other reasons for state marriage registrations was as evidence of marriage in a court of law, for divorce, for bigamy allegations.
Your idea that lawyers should draw up papers establishing the de facto marriage is a good one.
I am sure there’s a way for states to exit the marriage license issuance business.
In Alabama, I believe a marriage license is issued by a probate judge so the state executive offices are free from it.
There’s a way out of the darkness. But more darkness should be expected from SCOTUS and the federal government. I’ve never seen it so bad as now.
No time period for a CL marriage in TX.
Three elements:
Intent to be married
Hold out as being married
Stay together one night.
Just FYI.
That said, the legislature could abolish both statutory and CL marriage thus removing the state from the marriage business.