PointofLaw.com

FORUM FEATURED DISCUSSIONS PoL COLUMNS LEGAL EXPERTS ARTICLES BOOKS LINKS MASTHEAD ADVANCED SEARCH

FORUM

« Do stricter drunk driving laws result in more drunk driving fatalities? | Is medical malpractice insurance defense strategy to blame? »

March 25, 2005


Unintended (but earned) consequences: Ohio

The Legal Reader details how the language of Ohio's anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment resulted in the invalidation of the state's domestic violence law. Judge Stuart "Friedman said that because Ohio's domestic violence law recognizes the relationship between an unmarried offender and victim as one 'approximating the significance or effect of marriage,' it represents a direct conflict with the amendment's prohibition against such recognition and is thus unenforceable." (Brian Albrecht, "Issue 1 conflicts with domestic abuse law, judge says", Cleveland Plain-Dealer, Mar. 24).

Overlawyered (Mar. 20) covered a similar bait-and-switch consequence of Michigan's anti-gay-marriage amendment.

Posted by Ted Frank at 02:44 AM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
Miscellaneous









 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.