Civil Law And Full Faith Credit: What's The Legal Scope?

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, is a constitutional provision that ensures each state honours the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. This clause is particularly relevant in cases where a person attempts to violate it by relocating to another state to obtain a different ruling on matters such as child custody or other family law issues. The Full Faith and Credit Clause also applies to court judgments and laws across different states, with the Supreme Court interpreting and applying it differently in each case.

Full faith and credit clause and family law

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, is a constitutional provision that ensures that all states' decisions, public records, and rulings are honoured in all other US states. This clause is particularly relevant in family law, where it requires courts to recognise various family law rulings from other states.

Marriage and Divorce

The Full Faith and Credit Clause has been applied to marriage and divorce certificates, requiring states to recognise marriages and divorces that are legally valid in other states. For example, until 1967, several states banned interracial marriage and did not recognise interracial marriage certificates from other states. However, the Full Faith and Credit Clause was never used to force a state to recognise a marriage it did not wish to.

The clause's application to state-sanctioned same-sex marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships remains unresolved. In 1996, the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted, allowing states to refuse to recognise same-sex marriages performed in other states. The Respect for Marriage Act later repealed DOMA and required the federal government to recognise the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages.

Child Custody and Visitation

The Full Faith and Credit Clause also applies to child custody and visitation rights. Each state must enforce child custody or visitation determinations made by the court of another state, including both permanent and temporary orders and modifications made in the "home state". This ensures that child custody orders are carried out consistently across all states.

However, if one parent with joint physical custody moves to another state, it may be necessary to tailor the custody order creatively to accommodate the distance. In such cases, a court will consider the potential impact on the child's life if the move is permitted or denied, potentially changing custody to the other parent if the move is not in the child's best interests.

Child Support

The Full Faith and Credit Clause has been invoked by the Violence Against Women Act and the Federal Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act to ensure that child support orders are enforced across state lines.

Protection Orders

The Full Faith and Credit Clause also applies to protection orders, such as restraining orders, making them enforceable anywhere in the United States. This ensures that individuals, especially those fleeing domestic abuse, can have their protection orders enforced as they travel from state to state.

Full faith and credit clause and child custody

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, requires that all states' decisions, public records, and rulings be honoured in all other U.S. states. This includes family law rulings, such as those pertaining to child custody and visitation rights.

Child Custody and Visitation Rights

Child custody laws vary from state to state in the U.S., and determining custody rights can have profound and lasting consequences. When deciding on custody arrangements, courts always prioritise the child's interests and background above the parents' preferences, in what is known as the "child's best interest standard".

The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that child custody and visitation orders made in one state are carried out and enforced in all other states. This is based on the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), a federal law that requires every state to enforce custody or visitation determinations made by the court of another state.

Home State

The UCCJEA defines the "home state" as the state where the child has lived with either one or both parents for at least six consecutive months. If the child is under six months old, the home state is where the child has lived since birth.

Modification of Custody Determinations

Generally, a court cannot modify a custody order made by a court in another state. However, a court can modify a determination if the original court no longer has exclusive jurisdiction or has declined to exercise its jurisdiction.

Enforcement of Child Support Orders

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) is another important law that helps enforce child support orders across state lines. This law ensures that a person's "mere physical presence" in a state is not enough to change a child support order from another state.

Protection Orders

The Full Faith and Credit Clause also applies to protection orders, which must be enforced anywhere the individual goes in the U.S. This includes protection orders issued as a result of domestic abuse.

Limitations

While the Full Faith and Credit Clause applies to child custody determinations, there may be instances where it is not extended. For example, if the clause conflicts with a state's public policy, it may not be enforced. This was the case in New Mexico, which did not allow transgender individuals to change their gender on birth certificates and state ID cards, unlike California.

Full faith and credit clause and same-sex marriage

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, addresses the duty of individual states to respect the laws, records, and judicial proceedings of other states. The clause has been applied to same-sex marriage recognition, with varying interpretations.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause

The Full Faith and Credit Clause states that:

> "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

This clause establishes a requirement for states to recognise and respect the laws and legal proceedings of other states, promoting uniformity and cooperation among states.

Application to Same-Sex Marriage

The recognition of same-sex marriages performed in one state by other states has been a contentious issue. The Full Faith and Credit Clause has been invoked in this context, with differing opinions on its interpretation.

Some scholars argue that the clause should be interpreted to mandate interstate recognition of same-sex marriages. They emphasise the obligations inherent in the marriage relationship and the need to prevent states from authorising spouses to evade their responsibilities. Additionally, recognising valid same-sex marriages from other states would promote free interstate travel and commerce.

On the other hand, the conventional wisdom among scholars was that the Full Faith and Credit Clause did not require states to recognise same-sex marriages. This view considered same-sex marriage as a matter of ordinary state lawmaking, similar to other policy areas where states have autonomy.

Supreme Court Decisions

The US Supreme Court has addressed the issue of same-sex marriage recognition in several cases, but not directly through the lens of the Full Faith and Credit Clause. In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Court legalised same-sex marriage nationwide based on the Fourteenth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses. This decision rendered moot the discussion about the Full Faith and Credit Clause's application to same-sex marriage.

Additionally, in United States v. Windsor (2013), the Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage as between a man and a woman for federal purposes. The Court ruled that this provision of DOMA violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, but it did not address the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

Ongoing Debate

While the Supreme Court decisions have settled the legal status of same-sex marriage, the specific question of whether the Full Faith and Credit Clause requires states to recognise same-sex marriages from other states remains unresolved. The clause's application to this context has been a subject of debate among legal scholars and continues to be an area of interest in constitutional law.

Full faith and credit clause and public policy

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, is a constitutional provision that ensures harmonious interaction between the different court systems in the United States. It requires that all states' decisions, public records, and rulings be honoured in all the other US states.

The clause addresses the duty that states within the US have to respect the "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state". It requires each US court to give "full faith" and "credit" to the decisions rendered by other courts, including out-of-state courts. This clause helps to prevent conflicts between states and reduces the possibility of overlapping rulings.

The Supreme Court has recognised a "public policy exception" to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. This means that if the legal pronouncements of one state conflict with the public policy of another state, federal courts are generally reluctant to force the latter state to enforce the pronouncements of the former state.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause has been applied to various areas of law, including family law, child support, and protection orders. For example, it has been used to enforce protection orders across state lines, ensuring that victims of domestic abuse can have restraining orders enforced when they travel to a different state.

However, there are limitations to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. For instance, it was never used to force a state to recognise a marriage it did not wish to recognise, such as interracial marriages before the Supreme Court struck down all laws banning them in 1967. The clause's application to state-sanctioned same-sex marriages is also unresolved, although the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 required states to recognise lawful same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Full faith and credit clause and federal laws

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, found in Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, is a crucial aspect of the nation's federalist structure, which allows for both federal and state governance. This clause ensures that each state's "public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings" are recognised and respected by all other states.

The clause's primary purpose is to foster harmony among the various court systems in the country and reduce the possibility of conflicting rulings. It also aims to prevent confusion and uncertainty that may arise when multiple states exercise power over the same issue. The Full Faith and Credit Clause requires all states to honour and enforce each other's decisions, public records, and rulings, including those related to family law, such as marriage, child custody, and protection orders.

The interpretation and application of the Full Faith and Credit Clause have evolved over time, with the Supreme Court playing a pivotal role in shaping its understanding. For instance, in the 1813 Mills v. Duryee case, the Court ruled that out-of-state court judgments must be given the same conclusive effect in all states, regardless of whether the enforcing court agrees with the decision.

However, there are exceptions to the clause's application. For example, it does not require a state to enforce criminal punishments from another state's judgment. Additionally, the Supreme Court has differentiated between the credit owed to laws and that owed to judgments, allowing states more freedom to apply their own laws within their courts.

The Full Faith and Credit Act, enacted by Congress in 1948, further expanded on the clause by including legislative acts in the list of materials entitled to full faith and credit. This act can be found at 28 U.S.C. § 1738, which outlines the implementation and enforcement of the clause.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause has had a significant impact on various areas of law, including family law, with the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 ensuring that protection orders are enforced across state lines. Additionally, the Federal Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act (28 U.S.C. § 1738B) ensures that child support orders are also recognised and enforced across state lines.

Frequently asked questions