In 2005, the state of Texas overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the state Constitution that was added as Article I, Section 32. That section now reads:

Sec. 32.  MARRIAGE.

(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b)  This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

Note subsection 2. The question has arisen: does this forbid recognition of all legal statuses “identical or similar to marriage,” including actual marriage itself?

Article at the Miami Herald

NOTE FROM PAM: McClatchy also noted:

Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state.

…Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively “eliminates marriage in Texas,” including common-law marriages.

She calls it a “massive mistake” and blames the current attorney general, Republican Greg Abbott, for allowing the language to become part of the Texas Constitution. Radnofsky called on Abbott to acknowledge the wording as an error and consider an apology. She also said that another constitutional amendment may be necessary to reverse the problem.

Gregory Gadow

Gregory Gadow

7 Comments

Leave a reply