| Abstrakt: |
The article focuses on a court case in which plaintiffs, eight same-sex couples who are nonresidents of Massachusetts, claimed that the defendants, the U.S. Department of Public Health and the Registry of Vital Records and Statistics, denied them their right to marry in Massachusetts. Plaintiffs claimed that the "domicile evasion" provision of the state's marriage law was unconstitutionally enforced against same-sex couples. They also alleged that even if a rational basis existed for such enforcement, it would run afoul of the Privileges and Immunities Clause under the heightened scrutiny test. Plaintiffs sought an injunction to prohibit the Department from enforcing the law against same-sex couples and to direct the Department to grant marriage licenses to nonresident same-sex couples. The Superior Court of Massachusetts, sitting at Suffolk, held that the domicile evasion section of the marriage statute was constitutional because it applied equally to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, was rationally related to a legitimate state interest, and did not invoke fundamental right scrutiny under the Privileges and Immunities Clause. |
