Related Citations
-
Jeffrey M. Schmitt, A Historical Reassessment of Full Faith and Credit, 20 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 485 (2013).
Contending that pre- and post-ratification evidence indicate that the Effects Clause did not give Congress unlimited power to determine the conclusiveness of state judgments, as this interpretation would fundamentally impair federalism and state sovereignty.
-
Darren A. Prum, The Full Faith and Credit Clause: Do Factual Executive Documents Require Equivalent Treatment Between States?, 23 U. Fla. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 151 (2012).
Analyzing the Constitutional drafting process and subsequent implementing legislation to contend that the Full Faith and Credit Clause was understood to instruct sister-states to recognize official executive documents that contain factual information from another jurisdiction.
-
Charles M. Yablon, Madison’s Full Faith and Credit Clause: A Historical Analysis, 33 Cardozo L. Rev. 125 (2011).
Examining Madison’s speeches and writings on the Full Faith and Credit Clause and concluding that Madison sought a clause that would embody a vague but dynamic deference obligation between the states that could be increased by Congress over time.
-
Stephen E. Sachs, Full Faith and Credit in the Early Congress, 95 Va. L. Rev. 1201 (2009).
Utilizing the history of congressional efforts to exercise the power granted by the Full Faith and Credit Clause along with pre-Founding documents and state court decisions to argue that Clause was not generally understood to mandate the effect of state records in other states, but rather to leave such determinations to the legislative branch.
-
David E. Engdahl, The Classic Rule of Faith and Credit, 118 Yale L.J. 1584 (2009).
Arguing that states must only give effect to sister-state acts, records, and proceedings to the extent that it is mandated by federal congressional law.
-
Ralph U. Whitten, The Original Understanding of the Full Faith and Credit Clause and the Defense of Marriage Act, 32 Creighton L. Rev. 255 (1998).
Arguing that Congress was intended to have broad power under the Effects Clause to enact legislation such as DOMA and the Full Faith and Credit Clause does not require states to recognize marriages celebrated in other states.
-
Rex Glensy, The Extent of Congress’ Power Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, 71 S. Cal. L. Rev. 137 (1997)
Arguing that the first sentence of the Full Faith and Credit Clause contains compulsory, self-executing language instructing states to recognize sister-state acts, records, and proceedings.
-
Daniel A. Crane, The Original Understanding of the “Effects Clause” of Article IV, Section 1 and Implications for the Defense of Marriage Act, 6 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 307 (1998).
Concluding that the Effects Clause portion of the Full Faith and Credit Clause grants Congress unqualified power to determine the extent of faith and credit states should accord to other states’ acts, records, and proceedings.