Uncategorized

Voices of reason elsewhere

With a legislative agenda here that’s on the fast track to litigation, it’s worth noting how the courts are handling similar challenges elsewhere.

Yesterday, a federal  judge in North Dakota blocked that state’s recently enacted ban on most abortions, describing that law as “in direct contradiction to a litany of United States Supreme Court cases addressing restraints on abortion.”

U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland issued a temporary injunction delaying enforcement of that ban until the challenge could be resolved at trial, saying that he had no choice but to block the law. “The State has extended an invitation to an expensive court battle over a law restricting abortions that is a blatant violation of the constitutional guarantees afforded to all women,” he wrote.

And on Monday in Ohio, a federal judge ordered state officials to recognize the unions of same-sex couples who were married in other states but live in Ohio.

According to Lyle Denniston at scotusblog, U.S. District Judge Timothy S. Black conceded in his ruling that the Supreme Court’s decision last month in United States v. Windsor did not directly involve state power to ban same-sex marriages. But he said that the Court’s ruling was pointing toward that issue and applied some of its equality principles in support of his order.

This is not a complicated case. The issue is whether the State of Ohio can discriminate against same sex marriages lawfully solemnized out of state, when Ohio law has historically and unambiguously provided that the validity of a marriage is determined by whether it complies with the law of the jurisdiction where it was celebrated.

Throughout Ohio’s history, Ohio law has been clear: a marriage solemnized outside of Ohio is valid in Ohio if it is valid where solemnized. Thus, for example, under Ohio law, out-of-state marriages between first cousins are recognized by Ohio, even though Ohio law does not authorize marriages between first cousins. Likewise, under Ohio law, out of state marriages of minors are recognized by Ohio, even though Ohio law does not authorize marriages of minors.

How then can Ohio, especially given the historical status of Ohio law, single out same sex marriages as ones it will not recognize? The short answer is that Ohio cannot … at least not under the circumstances here.

Check Also

State Supreme Court rules retroactive application of teacher tenure repeal is unconstitutional

The state Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

The political compromise that repealed HB2 was enough for the NCAA and ACC, both of which have retur [...]

Conference comes a day after new report lauds benefits of same-day registration The new line-up for [...]

North Carolina’s largest public school system may be warning of “enormous disruptions” without speed [...]

Carol Turner hadn’t lived in North Carolina long before last November’s election. A retired nurse, s [...]

How many times do we have to say it? Well, it’s worth repeating – especially in the aftermath of rec [...]

As the national pundits weigh in on President Trump’s first 100 days in office and the General Assem [...]

How the General Assembly is spending “crossover week” and what it ought to be doing The last week of [...]

To casual observers, the recent controversy surrounding public school class-size mandates in grades [...]

Featured | Special Projects

Trump + North Carolina
In dozens of vitally important areas, policy decisions of the Trump administration are dramatically affecting and altering the lives of North Carolinians. This growing collection of stories summarizes and critiques many of the most important decisions and their impacts.
Read more


HB2 - The continuing controversy
Policy Watch’s comprehensive coverage of North Carolina’s sweeping anti-LGBT law.
Read more