> My interest in this is the opposite directions that Vermont and California
> seem to be going in. This would seem to give us a preview of the potential
> "enclaves" that may develop in terms of use of nanotech, biotech, medtech,
> privacy, etc. The question becomes -- would the people in Vermont view
> the situation in California as a sufficient violation of human rights
> as to go to war over it? Or is it entirely in the legal/governmental
> realms?
I'd be very surprized if the majority in California who voted for prop 22
(and with whom I am now ashamed to share citizenship) get what they want.
"Full faith an credit" is taken very seriously by federal courts. What
will likely happen is that a couple will join a Vermont civil union, move
to California, apply for some benefit of marriage, be denied, and appeal
to Federal District Court, which will rule prop 22 in violation of the
full faith and credit clause. The ninth circuit will uphold, and the USSC
will deny review. Of course this may take a few years.
Another big battlefield that will come up soon is federal recognition of
Vermont civil unions, which will probably follow the same course. The IRS
will deny a joint filing, or he INS will try to deport a "spouse", and
that suit will also be ruled in favor of recognizing a Vermont civil union
as a marriage in full force. The opposition will continue to be vocal and
continue to lie and whine about it, but they will lose.
I'm not at all surprized that Vermont was the first one to get it right.
Californians have proven many times that they don't care about freedom and
individual rights, while Vermont and New Hampshire always have.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:58 MDT