Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
03/22/2005 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR10 | |
| SB67 | |
| SB70 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 70 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SJR 10 | ||
| = | SB 67 | ||
SJR 10-SUPPORT FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT
8:35:09 AM
SENATOR FRED DYSON introduced SJR 10. Since 1998 44 states have
amended their constitution to better define marriage as between
one man and one woman. Courts in Massachusetts, Vermont and
California have made decisions casting doubts upon the
constitutionality of those laws. Marriages performed in
Massachusetts between same sex couple cause difficulty with
other states due to the differences in states laws. The US
Congress supports the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and Alaska
would show support by passing SJR 10.
8:39:24 AM
Senator Gene Therriault joined the committee.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH expressed preference for letting each
state decide its own laws.
SENATOR DYSON expressed preference for consistency across the
nation.
8:41:35 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Senator Dyson whether the Massachusetts
decision was done by the courts or by the people.
SENATOR DYSON responded the courts.
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS shared Senator Dyson's perspective.
8:44:14 AM
SENATOR FRENCH asked Senator Dyson whether he would support
adding an exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause
identifying that Alaska does not want to be put in the position
of honoring another states laws on marriage.
SENATOR DYSON said it would not have the same urgency as SJR 10.
CHAIR SEEKINS expressed support for Senator French's suggestion.
8:45:51 AM
MR. MICHAEL MACLEOD-BALL, director, Alaska Civil Liberties Union
(AkCLU) testified in opposition to the resolution. He said a
couple married in another jurisdiction subjects themselves to
Alaska's law when moving to Alaska. There is nothing that would
require Alaska courts or companies to acknowledge the validity
of the marriage.
8:47:34 AM
The AkCLU supports the full extension of marriage rights to all
couples. The author of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, Mr.
Bob Barr, opposes this type of legislation due to states rights.
8:49:19 AM
MR. MACLEOD BALL quoted Mr. Barr's testimony to the US Congress:
By moving what has traditionally been a state
prerogative, local marriage laws, to the federal
government it's in direct violation of the principals
of federalism. In treating the US Constitution as an
appropriate place to impose publicly contested social
policies it would cheapen the sacrosanct nature of
that document opening the door to future meddling by
liberals and conservatives. Third, it is unnecessary
as long as the Federal Defense of Marriage Act is
enforced.
8:50:39 AM
Conservative representatives have expressed concern about the
federal preemption of the state having the ability to make its
own decisions. Most people are against discrimination. SJR 10
has the potential to take away rights of partners such as
hospital rights, pension rights, and inheritance rights.
8:51:53 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Mr. Macleod Ball how Wyoming dealt with
the Full Faith and Credit Clause issue.
MR. MACLEOD-BALL did not know.
SENATOR THERRIAULT speculated they chose to ignore it.
MR. MACLEOD BALL quoted Senator John Haynes from Wyoming
testimony to the US Congress.
"State courts have over 200 years of experience in
deciding which out of state marriages they will
recognize."
What he is talking about is an area reserved for the states and
the federal government has traditionally stayed out of it.
8:53:39 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said in this case the people of Alaska have said
marriage should be between one man and one woman.
MR. MACLEOD-BALL said the issue is whether the people of the
United States should make decisions for the people in every
state.
CHAIR SEEKINS said often courts make decisions that are contrary
to what the people would do if they were asked.
8:58:54 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT agreed the beginning of the civil rights
movement would not have garnered majority support if the people
of the US were polled.
MR. MACLEOD BALL asserted an Alaska court might have to
interpret Massachusetts's case law in the event of a same sex
marriage ending in divorce. However, courts have always been
burdened with those types of decisions. Alaska still would not
have to recognize the marriage.
9:01:23 AM
MR. MACLEOD BALL took the position that SJR 10 was not
necessary. The Federal Defense of Marriage Act is already in
place.
9:02:59 AM
SENATOR FRENCH asked Mr. Macleod Ball what is in the Federal
Defense of Marriage Act that works against the idea of civil
unions.
MR. MACLEOD BALL said there was no short answer. The AkCLU's
concern is the federal amendment would change the benefit of
civil unions.
9:04:37 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS closed public testimony.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved SJR 10 from committee. Hearing no
objections the motion carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|