(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the “Alabama Marriage Protection Act.”
(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting the unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.
(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.
(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.
(Act 98-500, §§1, 2.)
Notes of Decisions
State ex rel. Alabama Policy Inst., 200 So. 3d 495 (Ala. 2015).
· cites it 7× “In 1998, the Alabama Legislature added to this chapter the “Alabama Marriage Protection Act,” codified at § 30-1-19, Ala.Code 1975 (“the Act”), expressly stating that “[m]arriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman” and that “[n]o marriage license shall…”
Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012).
· cites it 2× “03; Ala. Code § 30-1-19 ; Alaska Const. Art. 1, § 25; Alaska Stat.”
United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013).
“" Ala.Code § 30-1-19(e) (2011). When the couple files their next federal tax return, may it be a joint one? Which State's law controls, for federal-law purposes: their State of celebration (which recognizes the marriage) or their State of domicile (which does not)? (Does the…”
Lewis v. Harris, 908 A.2d 196 (N.J. 2006).
“XIII, § 7; Neb. Const. art. I, § 29; Nev. Const.”
Bailey v. Faulkner, 940 So. 2d 247 (Ala. 2006).
· cites it 2× “example, in response to nationwide efforts by homosexual activists to reduce the marriage covenant between one man and one woman to a mere contract between two (or more) people regardless of their sex, the Alabama Legislature reaffirmed its recognition of the institution of…”
Conaway v. Deane, 932 A.2d 571 (Md. 2007).
“I, § 29; Ala.Code § 30-1-19; ArizRev.Stat. § 25-101; Cal.”
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 109 So. 3d 176 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
· cites it 5× “03; § 30-1-19, Ala.Code 1975. Section 30-1-19,' known as the “Alabama Marriage Protection Act,” provides that “[mjarriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman” and that “[a] marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.”
Searcy v. Strange, 81 F. Supp. 3d 1285 (S.D. Ala. 2015).
· cites it 3× “Ala.Code § 30-1-19. Because Alabama does not recognize Plaintiffs’ marriage, Se-arcy does not qualify as a “spouse” for adoption purposes.”
Strawser v. Strange, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (S.D. Ala. 2015).
· cites it 4× “03 (2006) and Ala. Code 1975 § 30-1-19 are unconstitutional because they violate the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Strawser v. Strange, 105 F. Supp. 3d 1323 (S.D. Ala. 2015).
· cites it 4× “03 (2006) and Ala.Code 1975 § 30-1-19 are unconstitutional because they violate the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Bourke v. Beshear, 996 F. Supp. 2d 542 (W.D. Ky. 2014).
“See Ala.Code § 30-1-19 (2013); Ariz.Rev. Stat.”
D.H. v. H.H., 830 So. 2d 21 (Ala. 2002).
· cites it 3× “§ 30-1-19, Ala.Code 1975. Homosexual conduct is, and has been, considered abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature’s God upon which this Nation and our laws are predicated.”
— Ala. Code § 30-1-19(b) — 2 cases
— Ala. Code § 30-1-19(e) — 2 cases
United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013).
“" Ala.Code § 30-1-19(e) (2011). When the couple files their next federal tax return, may it be a joint one? Which State's law controls, for federal-law purposes: their State of celebration (which recognizes the marriage) or their State of domicile (which does not)? (Does the…”
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 109 So. 3d 176 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“03; § 30-1-19, Ala.Code 1975. Section 30-1-19,' known as the “Alabama Marriage Protection Act,” provides that “[mjarriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman” and that “[a] marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.