Texas AG Vows to Fight Gay Divorce Request

pols_reeferAll your ex’s live in Texas– except when you’re gay. A gay couple who married in Massachusetts, but live in Texas, are ready to pack their bags and head for Splittsville, but Texas General Greg Abbott (pictured) has vowed to fight any attempt the couple makes to divorce in Texas, which does not recognize their marriage. Instead, the couple may have to move to Massachusetts and establish residency there before they can get a divorce.

Pink News UK
has a rundown of Abbott’s latest statements:

“In the State of Texas, marriage is – and has always been – a union between one man and one woman.

“To prevent other states from imposing their values on this state, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a Constitutional amendment specifically defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman.

“Because the parties’ Massachusetts-issued arrangement is not a marriage under Texas law, they are asking a Texas court to recognise – and dissolve – something that does not legally exist.”

The lawyer acting for the man seeking a divorce told the Dallas Morning News that he will argue that the men have rights under Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The so-called Full Faith and Credit Clause provides, in part, that states recognise contracts from other states.

However, in 1996 Congress passed the Defence of Marriage Act.

States are not required to “treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.”

DOMA also prevents the federal government from gay and lesbian relationships as marriage “for any purpose,” even if the marriage is recognised by one of the states.”

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #gregabbott #marriageequality #texag stories and more


  • Alex

    Do they just have giant ten commandments sculptures set up in fields. WTF?

  • Sean

    See to me this is totally a full faith and credit case afainst the 10th Amenedment of the U.S. Constitution. If states choose to have marriage and people get married and move to another state and then decide to get divorced it shouldn’t be this difficult. Sure these states don’t have gay marriage, but as with adoption laws, you can just have a hopscotch approach here to at least enforcement. The economic burden alone of divorce is tough enough, now they want to force the burden of moving and all that comes with it (new job, new home, possibly new schools) back to the state of origin just to establish residency. I don’t think straight people would want that, so why do we have too? What is weird is that divorce and adoption will probably help the cause of gay marraige better than the actual passage of law.

  • Dubwise

    @Alex: even better, it’s right on the capitol lawn! (capital?)

  • petted

    Its true that is over by the capital… -feels awkward and uncomfortable- there is a nice memorial to the city’s fireman over by the front lawn, you’ll have to pardon me if I’d rather think of and discuss firemen

    Though to get political it does seem like the state could just choose to official recognize the marriage as a nullity in lieu of a divorce not sure if other states would recognize said nullity as a divorce not to mention it raises the rather nasty specter that in doma states that couples not seeking divorce might have zealots seeking to officially declare their marriages a nullity – shrug it seems like receiving a document officially declaring the marriage a nullity could sidestep the recognition issue but with some nasty fine tuning to be done.

  • LeaderofMen

    The irony.

    First they don’t want us getting married.

    Then, they don’t want us divorced.

    Wonder how the religious wackos are dealing with that one.

  • PatrickD

    Well, it’s nice to see Texas is holding Gays to the Bible’s admonition against Divorce. Make’s us more “Christian” than the breeders!

  • Charles J. Mueller

    Just one more horrible example of people sticking their busy-body noses into places where they do not belong.

  • Matt

    Knowing Texas, what’s likely to happen is that the state will win this case, setting up a further precedent that will make it even more difficult to win the right to marry, especially in Texas itself. This already happened once there, with a civil union couple. Since this is a marriage, it unfortunately fits the legal reasoning behind that unsuccessful case even better.

    Same-sex marriage is the most problematic of all gay rights issues. It’s best to tread carefully. If this had happened in a New England state, California, or even Iowa, the couple – and all of us – would have had a better chance. In Texas, there are more promising issues to address, such as working to strengthen the existing hate crimes law and emphasizing the applicability of anti-harassment laws to gay people.

  • Matt

    Dubwise, the building is a “capitol” and the city is a “capital.”

Comments are closed.