Potential Bigamy for Bisexuals

[Revenant_Threshold]

Let’s say I get married to another guy in California. Many states wouldn’t recognise that marriage, so; if I then marry a woman in one of those states, have I committed a crime?

I’d imagine I have in California (and other states that would recognise my first marriage) but it not being a federal issue (I think?) as long as I stay out of those states, i’m fine. Is that right? And I don’t think i’ve committed a crime at all in those states which don’t recognise that first marriage.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

Marriage is a civil contract. It is either legally recognized and legally dissolved or it isn’t.

I thought Massachusetts was the only state the currently legally recognized single-sex marriage.

However, my understanding is that the Defense of Marriage Act put into federal law the provision that no other state has to recognize a single-sex marriage performed validly in another state. I don’t know if any state presently does recognize Massachusetts civil marriages.

“No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian
tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or
judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe
respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is
treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory,
possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such
relationship.”

[Monty]

@Revenant Threshold

Let’s say I get married to another guy in California.

That’d be a neat trick since California law prohibit same sex marriage.

[Revenant_Threshold]

Massachusetts, then. Sorry, i’m not entirely sure where I pulled California from.

[Gfactor]

Right. California doesn’t work for this hypothetical. Just for the sake of argument, let’s try MA.

Wait. First there is the issue of liability for attempted bigamy, which implicates the defense of legal mistake. I don’t have time to go into detail, but I did find this:

If, however, Dick, thinking he is already married, marries Jane in order to be a bigamist, but in reality his first marriage is not valid, Dick is not guilty of bigamy no matter what his intent is.

Kessler, Kimberly, Comment: The Role of Luck in the Criminal Law, 142 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2183 (1994).

But let’s assume that RT marries Phillip in MA. Then leaves him and moves to VA, where he marries Connie. Has he committed bigamy? What if instead of marrying Connie in VA, he stays in MA and marries her there?

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Revenant Threshold

Massachusetts, then. Sorry, i’m not entirely sure where I pulled California from.

I was going to say out of your ass, but I’m too mature for that joke.

[Lama_Pacos]

The whole bisexual aspect seems somewhat irrelevant. I doubt the law would treat someone with spouses of two different genders in different states differently than someone with, say, two wives in different states.

[panache45]

@Lama Pacos

The whole bisexual aspect seems somewhat irrelevant. I doubt the law would treat someone with spouses of two different genders in different states differently than someone with, say, two wives in different states.

But they don’t recognize the first marriage, so as far as the non-MA states are concerned, he wasn’t previously married.

[Gfactor]

@Gfactor

But let’s assume that RT marries Phillip in MA. Then leaves him and moves to VA, where he marries Connie. Has he committed bigamy? What if instead of marrying Connie in VA, he stays in MA and marries her there?

What if RT divorces Phillip in MA, and then marries Connie in VA? This seems pretty far-fetched to me (it assumes that VA would consider a same-sex marriage valid based on its determination that a same-sex divorce was invalid), but:

Because DOMA declares that no state shall be required to give effect to any judicial proceeding respecting a same-sex marriage under the laws of another state, DOMA would entitle a state to refuse to recognize a divorce decree of another state, even absent a claim of fraud or lack of jurisdiction. This would mean, for example, that an individual would risk being charged with attempted bigamy should she attempt to remarry after having secured a divorce from her same- sex partner, because a forum might refuse to recognize the divorce which she had obtained, notwithstanding the absence of fraud and the decree-granting court’s having had both personal and subject matter jurisdiction.

Late in the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court quoted with approval a decision by the Supreme Court of Connecticut in which the constitutionality of that state’s divorce law was upheld. The Connecticut court had worried that if it had struck down the law as unconstitutional, it could have caused “consequences easily conceived but not easily expressed, such as bastardizing the issue and subjecting the parties to punishment for adultery.” Thus, the court feared that striking the law would affect the status of children born in subsequent marriages (which might have been made bigamous and void had the divorce law been struck) and might create grounds for possible criminal charges against the adults who might have been charged with adultery (or bigamy) had the divorce granted in accord with existing law nonetheless been ruled void. DOMA potentially creates the hor rors which the Supreme Court recognized as unacceptable over a century ago.

Strasser, Mark, DOMA and the Two Faces of Federalism,
32 Creighton L. Rev. 457 (1998)

[alphaboi867]

@Gfactor

…But let’s assume that RT marries Phillip in MA. Then leaves him and moves to VA, where he marries Connie. Has he committed bigamy? What if instead of marrying Connie in VA, he stays in MA and marries her there?

If he marries Connie in VA after marrying Phillip he hasn’t commited bigamy since VA defines marriage as between a man and a woman, therefore he is not married to Phillip. If he marries Connie in MA after marrying Phillip then he is commiting bigamy since MA law definces marriage as betweeb to people. The question is what happens if at some point after marrying Connie in VA same-sex marriage is legalized in VA.

[Otto]

And to throw another log on the fire, what if the OP entered into a civil union in Vermont, then without dissolving it married a woman in Virginia?

Or even more fun, what if the OP enters into a civil union in Vermont and without dissolving it marries a different man in MA? Or, what if he enters into a civil union in Vermont and, without dissolving it, enters into a domestic partnership in California with another man?

[Gfactor]

@alphaboi867

If he marries Connie in VA after marrying Phillip he hasn’t commited bigamy since VA defines marriage as between a man and a woman,

Well, almost:

§ 20-45.2. Marriage between persons of same sex.

A marriage between persons of the same sex is prohibited. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created by such marriage shall be void and unenforceable.

If I read the news reports correctly, they’ve passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage, but

The legislature must pass the amendment again next year [2006] before it is sent to voters in November 2006.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20050208-105116-7306r.htm

The legislature passed the amendment, but it won’t be final unless the voters approve it in November.

Gay Marriage Ban Advances in Va.

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2006/01/26/1

If he marries Connie in MA after marrying Phillip then he is commiting bigamy since MA law definces marriage as betweeb to people.

So, right result, wrong reason. The statute provides for this case. It says the MA marriage is “void in all respects in Virginia.” If the marriage is void, then it doesn’t count for bigamy.

What if he and Connie marry in VA and then move to MA?

The question is what happens if at some point after marrying Connie in VA same-sex marriage is legalized in VA.

A good question.

[matt_mcl]

Or how about this: Say I am a transsexual woman, having gotten a court order changing my legal gender in Illinois. Subsequently I marry a man in Illinois. Then I light out to Texas, which does not recognize transsexuality and therefore considers me a man. I then marry a woman in Texas.

Texas recognizes the marriage to the woman, as I am legally a man; Illinois does not, as I am legally a woman and cannot marry a woman. Illinois recognizes the marriage to the man, as I am legally a woman, but Texas does not, as I am legally a man and cannot marry a man.

You people really ought to get this sorted out.

[Ethilrist]

The question is what happens if at some point after marrying Connie in VA same-sex marriage is legalized in VA.

arrgg… what do they call it when there’s something that wasn’t illegal when you did it, but they just made it illegal, and they can’t prosecute you for having done it? That’s not likely to apply here because I don’t think it applies to continuing conditions (the example they used in social studies was swimming in a pond; it’s not legal any more, so if you do it again, they can charge you for it).

[Revenant_Threshold]

If Massachusetts doesn’t recognise transsexuality, I can have three partners concurrently completely legally. Anyone know if they do?

[Chronos]

If Massachusetts doesn’t recognise transsexuality, I can have three partners concurrently completely legally. Anyone know if they do?

Could you spell out that scenario explicitly? If a transexual recognized in Illinois as a woman marries a man in Illinois, then even if Massachusets does not recognize transexuality, I would think that they would consider that person to be a man married to a man (which marriage would still be recognized, and would still be an impediment to any further marriage).

[Revenant_Threshold]

Ah, good point. I didn’t think through the who-recognises-what entirely. Damn, I guess i’m just limited to two, then.