New York has become the latest state where gay marriages are possible. What's that? You missed the court ruling or legislative action that did that? Well, you were just looking in the wrong places. You should have been listening to Gov. David A. Paterson, who ordered state agencies to begin recognizing same-sex marriages performed in California and Massachusetts as well as Canada and other countries where the unions can legally be entered into:
The memo informed state agencies that failing to recognize gay marriages would violate the New York's human rights law, Duggan said.
The directive follows a February ruling from a New York state appeals court. That decision says that legal same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions are entitled to recognition in New York.
This is de facto legalization of gay marriage. New Yorkers merely have to go to one of those places and get married, then go back to New York and -- presto! -- they are legally married. Massachusetts has a waiting period, but Canada and California don't.
I've been saying for some time that the same-sex marriage issue would end up in the U.S. Supreme Court because of the Constitution's Full Faith & Credit clause (see here, for example). As more states follow New York's lead (or California's, for that matter), the pressure on the court to act will increase. New York is liable to be the next state to legislatively approve same-sex unions. The more people go out of state to marry, the louder the argument will become that the state is being unfore to all the other same-sex couples who didn't go out of state for a ceremony.
This will make the debate in Indiana heat up, but it won't really change anything here. Indiana's law not only forbids same-sex unions but recognition of those performed where they are legal. (New York is one of five states without that provision.) Without a constitutional amendment, we are vulnerable to what happened in Massachusetts: same-sex union courtesy of a court that threw out the state law banning them. It's possible, but not very likely. Our courts are a little more reserved.
