Talk:Massachusetts 1913 law
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Massachusetts 1913 law. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Massachusetts 1913 law at the Reference desk. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Initial items
[edit]"Following the Supreme Judicial Court's decicion in Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health (2003), and its subsequent result in May of 2004, the law was ressurrected by state officials,..."
- Is "ressurrected" the right term here? Just because no one choses to enforce a law does not remove it from the books. --66.173.192.96 16:54, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Full faith and credit, U.S.A. constitution
[edit]The commentary about the "full faith and credit" clause is troubling, because 1) I think it's factually wrong, 2) it's unsourced and seems to be original research (one editor's interpretation of the law), and 3) not terribly NPOV in its tone. DCB4W 01:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Legislative History
[edit]First time adding info anyone feel free to confirm/edit and post.
Stated on the page "No record of the state Senate debate has been found, so the motivation for the law is unknown." However the following is noted in another article by the already sited author from FindLaw.com. "Provisions of a little-known 1913 state law... These provisions are patterned after the Uniform Marriage Evasion Act (UMEA), enacted in the early twentieth century. (Uniform laws, in general, are drafted by an independent body called the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL). A uniform act has no independent force and effect until it is adopted by a state's legislature, at which time it becomes part of that state's code.)"1 Section 2 of the Uniform Marriage Evasion Act states that no marriage license will be given if the marriage will not be legal in the couples home state. The UMEA was approved by the NCCUSL at their national conference in 1912, it was then submitted to states for possible adoption. By 1920 some version of the Act had been adopted by 5 states, including Massachusetts in 1913.2 Beyond that the motivation for the creation of the Act and its adoption by Massachusetts is still unclear.
1. [1] Findlaw.com- Same-Sex Couples Prepare to Marry in Massachusetts, But the Governor Invokes An Archaic Marriage Evasion Act To Stop Out-of-Staters From Taking Vows- May 18, 2004
2. Uniform state laws in the United States. New York [N.Y.], 1920. The Making of Modern Law. Gale. 2007. Thomson Gale. 29 April 2007. Available to the public for viewing in the Ct State Library. Tcsurfer 21:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
More History
[edit]It is clear that the motivations for enacting this law are 'unknown'. The law itself was never used to prevent interacial marriages. The State of Massachusetts had legally sanctioned interracial marriages in 1843. This law had no effect on this issue.
It was a law that came out of the work of Uniform Acknowledgement Of Writtens Instruments Act
This act in turn came out of the work of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws
There is nothing in the law enacted in 1913 based on this work that prohibts interracial marriage. And since Massachusetts has decided to make legal same-sex marriages, this law cannot be used to prohibit same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.
What the law does is acknowledge and ensure that each State has the right to decide and determine for itself what laws are in the best interest of its citizens.
In essence if it is illegal to marry someone of the same sex in your state then coming to Massachusetts will not make that marriage legal. If you want the marriage to be legal, then get the laws changed in your state first or better yet, simply move to Massachusetts where it is already legal.
--G. Warren Manigault, II 14:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)