Quote:As long as we're hypothesizing, what about a case where one partner doesn't want to be married any more, so he or she moves to a state where gay marriage is not recognized, and tells his or her partner, "I'm not married to you, I'm in Alabama." 

 

This is a prime example of why (not all, but many) laws need to be national, not local. 

 

I think the jilted partner could still file in the state where he/she resides. That leaves two major issues, Alimony and Child Support.

 

The question of Alimony/Palimony would be up in the air, but those laws need to go away to create gender equality anyhow. Divorce should be the end of the entire relationship including the financial aspect. Agree on a division of the assets and move on, this man paying the woman for the rest of her life deal is absurdly paternalistic.

 

Child Support would be no different unless the departed partner was not blood kin nor legally a parent by adoption (I think that's how they handle the "my two dads" situation where it's legal right now). I've seen court cases where completely unrelated men were required to pay child support  for children who weren't theirs though, so the departed partner could still potentially be on the hook. Generally child support orders exist outside the marriage framework, so there shouldn't me much of an issue there in any case.

 

Some other issues do exist, like the division of joint assets and tax provisions, but we'll need some kind of precedence for that to become common.

---