(a) Only a female may marry a male. Only a male may marry a female. (b) A marriage between persons of the same gender is void in Indiana even if the marriage is lawful in the place where it is solemnized.
Indiana Code § 31-11-1-1 speaks for itself. The State admits that Plaintiffs seek to bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any relief under that statute. 2. Indiana law provides that “[t]he validity of the marriage, being governed by the law of the place of its celebration, must be recognized in Indiana as a matter of comity.”
Gunter v. Dealer's Transport Company
, 120 Ind. App. 409; 91 N.E.2d 377, 379 (Ind. Ct. App. 1950).
Gunter v. Dealer’s Transport Company
, 91 N.E.2d 377 (Ind. App. 1950) (en banc), speaks for itself. To the extent Plaintiffs allege that general principles of Indiana law require recognition of same-sex marriages entered into in other States, Defendants deny the allegation. 3. But under comity principles, Indiana is not required to recognize a marriage solemnized in another state if the marriage violates Indiana's public policy.
Mason v. Mason
, 775 N.E.2d 706, 709 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (while marriage between first cousins under the age of 65 is void in Indiana, marriage will be recognized by Indiana if the first cousins marry in a state where such marriages are recognized, as there is no Indiana statute that articulates a public policy against the marriage of first cousins).
Mason v. Mason
, 775 N.E.2d 706 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002), speaks for itself. 4. Under Indiana law, the only out-of-state marriages for which there is a public policy voiding the marriage upon returning to Indiana are those marriages between persons of the same sex and marriages entered into out of state so as to evade the prohibition of marrying while mentally incompetent, drunk or on drugs.
, I.C. § 31-11-8-6.
Case 1:14-cv-00406-RLY-TAB Document 43 Filed 05/16/14 Page 2 of 22 PageID #: 311