marriage does not need defense from Congress. Two gay people applying for the benefits and the obligations of marriage should stay together their whole life, that does not threaten a marriage. If your marriage is threatened, it may be because you have lost your job and cannot provide for your family. It may be because of emotional reasons. Congress is not going to save your marriage. If your marriage is not threatened, you do not need Congress to intervene. I will talk about that later. What I want to say now is that this bill is a fraud from beginning to end. It is a fraud. It purports to do two things: It is going to save the other States from having to go along with same sex marriages if and when Hawaii does so. No; it will not. First of all under the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has always recognized the public policy exception. If one State recognizes 12-year-old marriages and New York chooses not to, New York does not have to recognize a marriage of 12-year-olds if they get married in one State and move to New York, and so forth. If Hawaii chooses to recognize same sex marriages and Colorado or New Jersey has a policy against same sex marriages, they will not be forced to recognize it under the existing Constitution and the existing law. If they were, if the Supreme Court read the full faith and credit clause differently than it does, this could not stop it because you cannot amend the Constitution by a statute.
Jerry Nadler: “marriage does not need defense from Congress. Two gay people applying for the benefits and the obligations of marriage…”
On the recordJuly 11, 1996
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Opposing a bill related to same-sex marriage during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Jerry Nadler
Apr 8, 2025
The Trump administration is the most lawless in American history. That is why so many of his policies are being blocked through nationwide injunctions. Republicans see this as evidence of some liberal plot among the judiciary, but the…
Mar 11, 2025
The warrantless arrest of any legal permanent resident seemingly solely over their speech is a chilling, McCarthyesque action in response to the exercise of First Amendment rights to free speech.
Jan 9, 2025
Due to a personal matter, I was not in Washington D.C. today. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 7.





