# Legally married 16 year old girl. Does her right to fornicate end at the state line? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 30, 2003, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121 "2003-11-30T21:45:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/1 "2003-11-30T21:45:39Z")
In Maryland, the minimum age for marriage is 16 if the girl is pregnant. If a married MD couple with a 16 year old girl and an 18 year old boy went to another state to set up a household, where the minimum age to have sex and get married is 18, can the husband be prosecuted for having sex with a minor (his wife)? ---
**Author:** ![bugg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecae2f/32.png) [@bugg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bugg)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/2 "2003-11-30T21:53:35Z")
IANAL, but I believe the way the statutory rape laws are worded is they provide exceptions in the event that the actors are married. The fact that the state wouldn’t permit them to be married is meaningless, for because of full faith and credit, the other states essentially have to recognize the marriage. So, you can’t get arrested for having sex with your wife, even if you couldn’t legally marry your wife in the state you’re currently residing in. The fact that a state did recognize your marriage is good enough. This is why, I believe, full faith and credit is making the anti-gay marriage crowd nervous. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/3 "2003-11-30T22:02:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bugg \* > \*\*IANAL, but I believe the way the statutory rape laws are worded is they provide exceptions in the event that the actors are married. The fact that the state wouldn’t permit them to be married is meaningless, for because of full faith and credit, the other states essentially have to recognize the marriage. > > So, you can’t get arrested for having sex with your wife, even if you couldn’t legally marry your wife in the state you’re currently residing in. The fact that a state did recognize your marriage is good enough. > > This is why, I believe, full faith and credit is making the anti-gay marriage crowd nervous. \*\* I thought the The Defense of Marriage Act passed in 96 was specifically crafted to exempt the states from inter-state FF&C requirements and any duty to recognize the legitimacy of a gay marriage. [Anti gay marriage act clears Congress](http://www.cnn.com/US/9609/10/gay.marriage/) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Senate gave final congressional approval Tuesday to a bill that would deny federal recognition of same-sex marriages and give states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states. > > In a separate vote, the Senate voted 50-49 against a bill that would have banned employers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. > > Senators voted 85-14 for the Defense of Marriage Act. The House overwhelmingly passed the bill in July, and President Clinton has said he will sign it. > > The measure would not bar states from legalizing gay marriages within their borders, but states would not be obligated to recognize such marriages performed in another state. The bill was introduced by conservatives alarmed over a gay rights court case – scheduled to go to trial Tuesday – that could lead to Hawaii becoming the first state to legalize same-sex marriage. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/4 "2003-11-30T22:07:10Z")
After Vermont began recognizing gay marriage, a bunch of states passed laws effectively getting rid of full faith and credit. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/5 "2003-11-30T22:14:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diceman \* > \*\*After Vermont began recognizing gay marriage, a bunch of states passed laws effectively getting rid of full faith and credit. \*\* Does this vacating of the reciprocal interstate FF&C understandings potentially impact the young married couple outlined in the OP? ---
**Author:** ![SeekingTruth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/34f0e0/32.png) [@SeekingTruth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeekingTruth)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/6 "2003-11-30T22:21:37Z")
didn’t the defense of marriage act specify same-sex unions were allowed to be not recognized? If he’s 18 and she’s 16, ff&c should still apply. I can’t beleive I’m gonna say this, can we get a lawyer here? ---
**Author:** ![KP](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a9adbd/32.png) [@KP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KP)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/7 "2003-11-30T22:22:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Legally married 16 year old girl. Does her right to fornicate end at the state line? As far as I know, she doesn’t have a ‘right to fornicate’ in any state. I checked several references, and they confirmed my understanding that “fornication” means sex between two people who are not married to each other. It’s sure common in todays world, and the laws against it are generally unenforced, except with minors, but a ‘right’? Hardly. ---
**Author:** ![Akatsukami](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ea666f/32.png) [@Akatsukami](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akatsukami)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/8 "2003-11-30T22:27:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by astro \* > \*\*Does this vacating of the reciprocal interstate FF&C understandings potentially impact the young married couple outlined in the OP? \*\* Note that[list=1] [li]The bill specifically allows states to deny recognition of same-sex marriages, not to disallow “full faith and credit” in any circumstances[/li][li]No state currently recognizes marriages between people of the same sex (a Vermont “civil union” is _not_ legally recognized as a marriage), although it is entirely possible that Massachusetts must with six months[/li][li]“Full faith and credit” appears to be a Constitutional requirement, so any case turning on it will inevitably wind up before SCOTUS[/li][li]No matter what decision SCOTUS hands down in such a case, it will be as politically decisive as Dred Scott (which was basically a “full faith and credit” case, too).[/li][/list=1] ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2003, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/9 "2003-11-30T23:55:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diceman \* > \*\*After Vermont began recognizing gay marriage, a bunch of states passed laws effectively getting rid of full faith and credit. \*\* No, they passed laws permitting themselves to refuse to apply the principle of comity as regards gay marriages or civil unions contracted in another state where it had been legalized. They can no more “effectively get rid of full faith and credit” than they can repeal freedom of speech – it’s a Constitutional guarantee. Of course, at the moment Court decisions have rendered it a Constitutional guarantee written on Swiss cheese, but it’s still in there. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2003, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/10 "2003-12-01T00:40:38Z")
The U.S. Supreme Court has already exempted marriage from the Full Faith and Credit clause: “[The Full Faith and Credit clause does not] compel a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate,” under _Pacific Employers v. Industrial Accident Comm._, 306 U.S. 493, 501 (1939). More recently, the Supreme Court has held that the Full Faith and Credit Clause does not require a state to apply another state’s law in violation of its own legitimate public policy. _Nevada v. Hall_, 440 U.S. 410 (1979). When the Supreme Court has guaranteed marriage rights, such as when it struck down state laws against interracial marriages in _Loving v. Virginia_, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), it was based on the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, not the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2003, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/11 "2003-12-01T01:02:23Z")
> [@](#): > > More recently, the Supreme Court has held that the Full Faith and Credit Clause does not require a state to apply another state’s law in violation of its own legitimate public policy. Which may or may not apply to same-sex marriage, since every state supreme court that’s heard a same-sex marriage case since Hall was handed down has found that there is no legitimate state interest in denying the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2003, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legally-married-16-year-old-girl-does-her-right-to-fornicate-end-at-the-state-line/216121/12 "2003-12-01T01:12:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > \*\* > They can no more “effectively get rid of full faith and credit” than they can repeal freedom of speech – it’s a Constitutional guarantee. > > \*\* Actually, my recollection from law school is that the Full Faith & Credit aspect of the Constitution is not self-actuating. In other words, Congress gets to decide how much or how little FF&C is appropriate. (Note that the same is not true of freedom of speech.)