Guns, CCW and Full Faith and Credit

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

ALot of talk out there about "full faith and credit" among states regarding marriage.

To those scholars in the know, I have a question.

WHat is the "full faith and credit clause?" What are the limits/scope? I understand that marriages in one state must be honored in another. Where does this stop?

And if a marriage can be credited across state lines, why then is CCW any different? Your DL is accepted by the state you are visiting. Your car registration is accepted. Why not out-of-state CCW? Is this a federal question?

 

[RKCheung]

I'm guessing that a CCW holder would have to get arrested for carrying illegally in another state and successfully use the "full faith and credit" clause as a defense for doing so in order to set the judicial precedent that the clause extends to CCWs.

Then again, I'm not a lawyer so I have really have no idea...

 

[Don Gwinn]

And if a marriage can be credited across state lines, why then is CCW any different?

The courts choose to consider it different. A marriage MUST be credited across state lines, ditto driver's licenses, etc.

However, there are some things besides CCW that are not reciprocal--at least I believe there are. Professional licenses, for instance?

I believe that the faith and credit clause should apply to CCW, but I don't know the reasoning behind why it doesn't. In fact, I'm not sure the question has ever been decided by a court, and if it hasn't, then there would be no legal reasoning to cite.

I will point out, as I'm sure you know well, that gun issues are always different for our courts. No issue involving guns is treated at all consistently with the way other issues are treated. But often there's no explanation for why this is done--it's just done. Look for the federal courts' explanation of why the Supreme Court has ducked Second Amendment cases since the terribly flawed (from any point of view) Miller case, and you'll find only silence. Ditto for the "incorporation" of the Bill of Rights via the 14th Amendment. There's no actual action taken on the 2nd there, they simply have refused to take up the question of whether the 2nd ought to be "incorporated" like ALL the other Amendments in the BOR. So there's no reasoning, no argument, nothing to take issue against. Just silence. :banghead:

 

[M1911Owner]

I've been wondering this myself the last couple of days. Here's the hypothetical I've wondered about: Suppose a guy in Arkansas marries his 12 year old sister (supposing for the hypothetical that that really is legal there), and then moves to some other state, say, Georgia. Does Georgia have to recognize that marriage as valid and binding? If not, why the ruckus about Mass. and San Francisco? If so, why doesn't it also apply to a CCW permit?

 

[Pendragon]

thats kind of icky, but I think there are states where you can get married at 14 or maybe a little younger?

also - I think some places outlaw 1st cousin marriages, some allow it.

from what I understand, you may not be able to marry your 14yr old student on one state, but if you go where you can and come back, its legal - although I wonder about the whole taking a minor over state lines thing - actually, I don't wonder.

 

[Devonai]

Don: Hooray for Get Fuzzy!

I can just hear the elitist judges now: "Marriage licenses aren't a life-and-death issue. Civilians carrying guns in my state is."

Technically and legally, of course our CCW licenses should be reciprocal. But face it, elitist leftists don't consider self defense to be a "civil right."

 

[M1911Owner]

Pendragon, I apologize for making the example too icky; I wanted something that clearly wouldn't be legal in most states, but might, plausibly, be legal somewhere. And I wanted it similar in nature to the questions that are currently being raised in Mass. and San Francisco, because those are said to almost certainly be covered by the Full Faith and Credit Clause. I would expect that the question of marriages that are legal in some states but not in others would have been adjudicated by now, and that there would be a body of case law that one of the legal beagles among us might be aware of.

There do seem to be a lot of areas where states don't give full faith and credit to each other, as has been pointed out--professional licenses, CCW permits, and I'm sure many others. It does pique my curiosity about the case law on the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and where it applies and doesn't apply, and how you know the difference.

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

BTT

 

[Standing Wolf]

Technically and legally, of course our CCW licenses should be reciprocal. But face it, elitist leftists don't consider self defense to be a "civil right."

You're right, although I believe the leftist extremists consider our keeping and bearing arms a threat to the state.

 

[tcdrennen]

SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal last year from a veteran, civilian employee for the Navy at the Pentagon, who worked iwith sensitive material and has a VA CCW permit; he sued to be allowed to carry when visiting his parents in NY (Long Island, IIRC) claiming exactly that - the Full Faith and Credit should mean he can carry in NY on his VA permit.

 

[Hedger]

FF&C

“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.†U.S. Const., Art. IV, §1

The 2003 SCOTUS case Franchise Tax Bd of Calif v. Hyatt (unanimous opinion) gives an overview of Full Faith and Credit as applied to state statutes.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02-42.pdf

SCOTUS is more inclined to require FF&C for judgments versus statutes.
Because marriages (of any kind) are almost always based on statutory rights, FF&C for gay marriages may be a tougher sell. Lots of interesting legal questions, tho.

For example, if a state permits gay marriages, if the couple is divorced, you get a judgment saying in effect they were married and now they are not. That divorce decree may be entitled to FF&C to enforce the judgment. Another interesting thing would be if the gay couple gets married in the state that allows it, then files an action for declaratory judgment in that state to get a judgment that declares they are married (assuming the can meet the "case and controversy" requirement of most states). If that happens, they may end up with a judgment....

CCW permitting is also statutory, thus SCOTUS may be less likely to require FF&C. One of the amendments now floating on the Gun Lawsuit's bill would permit LEO's (and prosecutors I think) to cross statelines CCW without having to get a permit from the other state.

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Hedger,

Has CCW under FF&C ever been tested?

Hate to bug you, but you seem well informed.

 

[Hedger]

I'm not aware of any....

I'm not aware of any SCOTUS cases... those are the ones that probably count. Haven't checked all the state and Fed Circuits for cases. We probably would have heard about them if they existed.

Here is a relatively cogent basic explanation (from a Harley riding lawyer) of why FF&C probably won't help on CCW issues: http://www.abatelegal.com/2001/april2001.html

I wish the NRA would use some of its bucks to float a constitutional amendment for interstate CCW.... My state is a must issue state, no test required. As long as you aren't banned under federal law and you can convince our Sheriff you know something about guns (extremely easy "I have been shooting since I was 10"), you get the permit.

I tend to think CC permits should be relatively easy to get for the following reasons:

- Lots of people CC anyway without permits.
- If you issue a permit, LEO's get that information almost immediately from dispatch if you are pulled over. Smart LEOs already assume everyone they approach is armed in some fashion.
- If you do something stupid with the weapon, you will most likely be prosecuted for the stupid thing, rather than for hiding the weapon before you do it.
- People who bother to get a CC permit are less likely to do something stupid with the weapon in the first place. Not always true, but most of the time I would think.
- It is already illegal in many states to CCW in "sensitive" areas such as schools, courthouses, etc., even if you have a permit. I have to unpack if I have to run into the school for the kids.

I am a deputy prosecutor, so I don't have to have a permit in my state