OOPS...I meant this to be a reply to the same-sex marriage thread...not a new post. Oh well..my apologies.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Laura
My two cents - or whatever it might be worth.
When discussing same-sex marriage as a legal issue one must look to the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution. Massachusetts will begin marrying same-sex couples later this month. There is a Massachusetts statute (M.G.L. c. 207 § 11) that states: “No marriage shall be contracted in this commonwealth by a party residing and intending to continue to reside in another jurisdiction if such marriage would be void if contracted in such other jurisdiction, and every marriage contracted in this commonwealth in violation hereof shall be null and void.” So the idea is that people cannot travel to Mass to be married if their domiciled state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
However, the Full Faith and Credit clause provides that other states must recognize the judgments, acts, etc. of sister states. And, according to Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 176-77, when conflicts such as this arise between the Mass statute and the Constitution, the issue must be resolved in favor of the Constitution.
Then there comes DOMA (Declaration of Marriage Act) which was passed in 1996 by Clinton...which basically tells the states that they do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the FFC clause of the Constitution. Although DOMA's constitutionality has never been challenged I believe it will be soon after Massachusetts starts marrying same-sex couples. Many people feel that it is discriminatory in itself and/or Congress does not have the power to limit the scope of the FFC.
Anyway - there's a couple of different ways to look at the issue. But, and it's a big "but"... don't put too much weight to my opinion...I haven't even applied to law school yet.
Andrew...you provide such great information and insight regarding your experiences at BULS. I'm hoping that you can offer some insight and/or advice on my situation.
My question..Is it feasible to work part time and attend law school full time? I plan to start law school in the fall of 2005. I currently work as a litigation paralegal in downtown Boston. I do not want to lose my place in a good firm and I have the need to work at least part time (20 hrs). My employer has agreed to work around a full time law school schedule.
I understand that the first year is the hardest and, on top of that, you are not able to pick and choose your schedule of classes. With these things in mind is an arrangement such as mine realistic? How much time during your first year was devoted to classes and study?
Any thoughts or advice is greatly appreciated.
« on: November 13, 2004, 08:44:38 PM »
Little-known Disgusting Fact #277:
Nope, nor do we (well, the real ones, at least) eat refined white sugar, as it is mostly refined with bone char
« on: November 13, 2004, 08:06:17 PM »
It's ok. I know I could've scored higher but I went through a huge breakup with my ex-boyfriend 2 nights before the exam. I contemplated on taking it again but I changed my mind. I didn’t have any time for my loved ones while preparing for the exam. Not even my sweet little sister
Do Vegans eat lard?
« on: November 13, 2004, 07:16:04 PM »
Not really meaning to rip on your LSAT Score... just trying to give ol' Elle proper credit.
« on: November 13, 2004, 12:03:52 PM »
It's not a juror's place to make or attempt to make legal reform.