each state decides weather to legalize it or not
each state decides weather to legalize it or not
In the United States, the states have always regulated eligibility and validity of marriage. Only once before, in the issue of interracial marriage, did the federal government overrule states rights in this regard.
federal issue
Civil Unions were invented as an alternative to marriage for same-sex couples. In the United States, all marriages are entered into according to state laws. The federal government does not issue marriage licenses, register marriages, or issue marriage certificates. Since civil unions are analogous to marriages, the same holds true for them.
Senator Paul is opposed to same-sex marriage. But, on January 30, 2013, he announced that he opposed the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), because he said the federal law made same-sex marriage a federal issue instead of a state one. He said same-sex marriage could have been decided state-by-state, but he feared it would be decided federally because of DOMA, which would result in urban centers having more influence on the outcome than rural areas.
Marriage licenses are usually issued at the county level.
Same-sex marriage can be banned by state or federal statute, or by amending the federal or state constitution. In many cases, existing marriage laws already preclude same-sex marriage and no action is needed to ban it.
No. A constitutional amendment is not necessary. Marriage is a state-level issue. The only thing the Federal Government can do is to strike down discriminatory bans on same-sex marriage.
No, Congress does not issue marriage licenses. Marriage licenses are typically issued by state or local governments in the United States, as marriage laws fall under state jurisdiction. While Congress can influence marriage laws through legislation, the actual issuance of licenses is managed at the state level.
Marriage licenses are issued by the state. In most cases the state has directed the county handle the registration.
State.
The 2008 decision by the California State Supreme Court to permit same-sex couples to marry in that state was an exercise of states rights, in the face of a federal government which had many years earlier prohibited itself from recognizing same-sex marriages and given other states the right to ignore them as well. A better example of an issue of federalism occurred afterwards, when a public referendum led to the amendment of the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage. The Supreme Court of the State of California later ruled that the referendum was unconstitutional and the amendment invalid. However, that decision was appealed in federal court, leading some to scratch their heads and wonder why the federal government would be involved in reviewing a state's decision to legalize same-sex marriage in its own territory when legal precedence shows that marriage laws are not a federal issue. In some respects, this seems to be a violation of California's right to control its own marriage laws.