ORRIN HATCH'S FMA: Matt Taylor

I was just reading the text of the FMA proposal offered by Orrin Hatch:

"Civil marriage shall be defined in each state by the legislature or the citizens thereof. Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to require that marriage or its benefits be extended to any union other than that of a man and a woman."

It's not perfect, but it looks pretty darn good to me. States can still institute same-sex marriage (or civil unions) democratically, but cannot be required to do so by the actions of judges or other states. The second sentence could be improved by replacing "Nothing in this Constitution" with specific references to equal protection and full faith and credit, since the current language could be absurdly interpreted to refer to the previous sentence of the same amendment, or even to future amendments. Also, I still think it would be better to make a structural change to our system of judicial decision-making, to avoid future struggles over court-imposed "social issue" decisions.

But overall, Sen. Hatch's proposal seems livable, and much more democratic and flexible than the Musgrave amendment.
posted by Eve at 3:49 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home