Divorce Attorneys
Landrieu may shift marriage-law stand
|
|
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, R-Nev., criticized Republicans for forcing an election-year vote on a constitutional amendment when the country is facing such serious issues as continued instability in Iraq, high gasoline prices, and problems with health care. “What are we dealing with here in the Senate this week?” Reid asked. “We’re dealing with an issue that is so far down the list of the priorities of the American people it’s not in the top 30. So, I’m terribly disappointed that we’re not addressing the issues that affect American people in their day-to-day lives.” Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said that he fears that if the amendment is enacted, Congress might some day come back to say that couples could never divorce, or that only people who are committed to having children, or a certain number of children, could marry. He accused Republicans of bringing up the vote in a desperate election-year effort to change the subject from failed policies on everything from the war in Iraq to Hurricane Katrina. Passage requirements Today’s vote is expected to be on whether to bring the amendment up without extended debate. It needs 60 votes. Supporters are conceding that, at least on the amendment itself, they will do well to get over 50 votes – far short of the 60 needed to proceed to a vote and the 67 needed to move the constitutional amendment forward. Currently, 19 states have constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriage and another 26 have laws similar to the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by President Clinton in 1996. To amend the Constitution, the House and Senate must approve the amendment by a two-thirds vote or better, and than the amendment needs approval of three-quarters of the state legislatures. According to a recent Gallup Poll, 50 percent of Americans support the amendment, while 47 percent are opposed. |
Related Articles from Attorney for Divorce
Landrieu may shift marriage-law stand
Two years after voting against a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., is reassessing her position with a key procedural vote scheduled for today. Spokesman Adam Sharp said that Landrieu will announce her position before the vote. She previously said that she believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that individual states are in the best position to decide the issue. She is reassessing her position after 78 percent of Louisiana voters approved a similar state constitutional amendment in 2004, barring same-sex marriages and civil unions, and because courts, at
High Court Lets Mass. Gay-Marriage Law Stand
The Supreme Court (search) on Monday rejected a challenge to the only state that allows gay marriages, declining to hear an appeal aimed at overturning the Massachusetts law that prompted a national debate on the legality and morality of same-sex unions (search). The decision ended the legal fight over a 4-3 Massachusetts high court ruling last November giving gay couples the right to marry. But both sides say the U.S. Supreme Court's unwillingness to intervene means there will be more fights in courts and legislatures around the country. President Bush (search) has promised to make passage of an anti-gay marriage constitutional
Marriage law corrections to stand while lawsuit pending, lawmakers decide
With a lawsuit pending over Arkansas' marriage-age law, the state Legislative Council decided Friday it would allow recent revisions to the law to remain in place. The council voted to withdraw its previous request that the Code Revision Commission reverse administrative corrections it made to Act 441 of 2007, a law that was intended to raise the minimum marriage age in Arkansas to 18 but inadvertently allowed people of any age to marry with parental consent. In July, the commission attempted to clarify the law by removing the extraneous word "not" from a clause that was supposed to allow pregnant girls under
Marriage law should be added to state constitution
Oklahoma has a 1997 law that was enacted to protect the state from being forced to recognize homosexual marriages from other states. A court ruling this week in Massachusetts has hastened the day when that protection might be needed. The Bay State's Supreme Judicial Court decided by a 4-3 vote that homosexual couples have a constitutional right to marry. Unfortunately, it's not enough to write off such a decision as some other state's foolishness. The U.S. Constitution's "full faith and credit" clause requires a state to recognize a compact made in another state if it doesn't expressly conflict with its own laws. Oklahoma's
Alberta Tories plan to renew marriage law
Alberta Premier Ralph Klein says he will renew legislation to prevent same-sex marriages in the province, despite saying a day earlier he didn't think it would hold up in court. The province's Marriage Amendment Act defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The five-year statutory limitation on the use of the legislation's notwithstanding clause expires next week, unless it is renewed. On Thursday, Klein's Conservative Party caucus voted to bring the legislation back to the legislature for renewal despite warnings from the province's justice minister that it likely won't work. After the vote, Klein said his