Search for: "In Re Marriage of Full" Results 1 - 20 of 1,985
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2013, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
” Those who opposed DOMA did not necessarily disagree with the characterization of the effect of full faith and credit on same-sex marriages. [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 9:40 am by WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF
This opinion will not be published. 2010AP392 In re the marriage of: Stumpner v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 11:07 am by WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF
This opinion will not be published. 2009AP2564 In re the marriage of: Ar-Rahmaan v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 6:43 pm
The Act calls for the full repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which singles out lawfully married same-sex couples for [...] [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 2:56 pm
When your spouse is not in the United States, and you're looking to establish a permanent residence, the process involves consular processing. [read post]
8 Mar 2022, 1:14 pm
Understandable.That said, the opinion uses the full names of the spouses. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 6:32 pm by Mary Whisner
If you're keen to read about marriage issues, the symposium articles are available here.The articles present a range of opinion, but first one I looked at (George W. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 4:17 am by Timothy P. Flynn
Now, they're at it again; this time in the context of the same-sex civil rights movement.Chief Justice Roy Moore, from his re-acquired seat on the Alabama Supreme Court, has issued a letter to each of the state's 68 probate judges, instructing [warning] them to follow state law, and to disregard a federal ruling that struck Alabama's state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. [read post]
13 Apr 2020, 1:46 pm
There are extraordinarily few appellate opinions that are as clear, coherent, and full of common sense as this one today from Justice Raphael.It's really just an outstanding opinion. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 12:17 pm by Guest Blogger
              But what Ginsburg did not emphasize, and what the advocates of full public acceptance of plural marriages fail to grasp, is that the Constitution’s commitment to equality – the very thing that makes contemporary marriage so well suited to same-sex couples -- also argues for privileging monogamy in law. [read post]