This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Wednesday, May 18th, 2011. I'm Caleb Brown.

Marriage Equality is a constitutional issue, a federal issue, according to attorney David Boyas equal protections enshrined

in the 14th Amendment demands marriage equality now.

We spoke about the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger at a Cato Institute forum on the subject held today.

Given the standard Libertarian argument that the government ought to get out of the business of marriage altogether, failing that. Why not leave this in the hands of

states? Why not let federalism help us establish what should and should not be when it comes to marriage.

I think primarily because the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause

are part of the National Constitution. The whole point of passing the 14th Amendment

was that there were certain constitutional standards that ought to apply to all of the states

and that when you were talking about fundamental rights like the right

to marry, that was something that you needed to have protection for people in every state.

14 times, I think, 14 or 18 times,

since 1988, the United States Supreme Court has held that marriage is a fundamental right.

It is a right that is inherent in the right to liberty to association, to due process,

equal protection.

Those are national rights.

You don't want to put the freedom of press up to a vote state by state.

You don't want to put the right to be free from government

intrusions into your home up to a vote state by state. You don't put the right to marriage as a fundamental right up state by state.

For example, you had a situation where Wisconsin passed a law that said people who have abused a initial marriage can't

get another marriage license if you have failed to pay child support or done other things that are inconsistent

with fulfilling your marriage responsibilities, you can't get another marriage license.

...