Full Faith and Credit Clause: Article IV, Section 1 (2023)

Article IV, Section 1, of the Constitution provides, “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State; And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.” On its face, the Full Faith and Credit Clause affects the structure of American federalism and interstate relations in two fundamental ways. First, it requires each state within the union to give full faith and credit to the acts, records, and judicial proceedings of the other states. And second, it allows Congress to further effectuate the first clause by clarifying the manner in which out-of-state acts, records, and judicial proceedings are to be proven and the effect they are to be given.

The text of the clause suggests that states are obligated to give full effect to the official actions of other states. For example, if a person obtains a judgment of divorce in Nevada, the plain language of the Full Faith and Credit Clause seemingly requires all other states to recognize and effectuate the legal validity of this decree. But the practical reality is that while states regularly give legal effect to the acts, records, and judgments of other states when they are consistent with the policies and interests of the forum state, they retain substantial discretion to reject full faith and credit to these out-of-state actions when they conflict with the laws or public policy interests of the forum state.

Contents

  • 1 THE ORIGINS OF THE CLAUSE
  • 2 THE MEANING OF FULL FAITH AND CREDIT
  • 3 CONGRESSIONAL AND JUDICIAL CONSIDERATION OF THE CLAUSE
  • 4 THE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF FULL FAITH AND CREDIT
(Video) Constitution Line by Line: Article 4, Section 1- Full Faith and Credit

THE ORIGINS OF THE CLAUSE

Many view English common law as the genesis for the Full Faith and Credit Clause, finding the terms “faith” and “credit” to be terms of art developed as part of the discourse between English common law (secular) and ecclesiastical (religious) courts. Court decisions from the end of the sixteenth century reveal that some common law courts gave “faith and credit” to the decisions of ecclesiastical courts and allowed the decisions of these courts to govern disputes under common law. In some cases, the phrase “faith and credit” was used alone, while in others the phrase was modified as “entire faith and credit,” “full credit,” or “full faith.” Some scholars assert that when the modifier “full” or “entire” was used, the phrase meant that the judgment or records from another court would be not only admissible in the forum court but also conclusive as to the truth of the matter asserted.

Evidence suggests, however, that the complete phrase “full faith and credit” was not used until it was incorporated by the United States in the Articles of Confederation. On November 12, 1777, a clause reading, “That full faith and credit shall be given in each of these States to the Records, Acts, and Judicial Proceedings of the Court and Magistrates of every other State,” was adopted by the Continental Congress and included in the Articles of Confederation. Records indicate that this provision was approved without any debate. And although the Articles generally afforded the states substantial autonomy and independence, the Full Faith and Credit Clause was one provision where the states were constitutionally obligated to provide some level of cooperation and deference to the official actions of other states.

There are five reported cases addressing the Full Faith and Credit Clause under the Articles of Confederation between 1786 and 1788. In two of these cases, the forum court gave conclusive effect to judgments rendered by out-of-state courts. In the other three cases, the forum court ruled that it was not obligated to give conclusive effect to the extraterritorial judgment, based either on a finding that the out-of-state court lacked jurisdiction to render its initial judgment or that the Full Faith and Credit Clause required only evidentiary consideration, not conclusive effect, to be given to the other state’s judgment. Thus, from the inception of the clause, there was debate over its scope and substance. In fact, in addressing the clause as used in the Articles of Confederation, James Madison commented that its meaning was “extremely indeterminate” and of “little importance under any interpretation which it will bear.”

Like many other provisions in the Articles of Confederation, the Full Faith and Credit Clause was readopted and included in the Constitution, taken from the last paragraph of Article IV of the Articles and placed in the first provision of Article IV of the Constitution. The members of the Constitutional Convention adopted the Articles’ version of the Clause, but made two fundamental modifications. First, the framers extended the clause to include nonjudicial “public” acts because they believed that the acts of state legislatures sometimes served similar purposes to acts of courts. And second, they gave Congress the power to prescribe the manner in which acts, records, and judicial proceedings could be proved and the effect thereof. This second provision was proposed by James Madison, who felt that it was necessary given the “nature of the Union.” Others, including Edmund Randolph of Virginia, disagreed with Madison’s proposal, claiming that it would allow Congress to impose future limitations on the power of the states, particularly with respect to their ability to consider the effect of out-of-state judgments.

(Video) Article IV for Dummies: Full Faith and Credit Explained

As ratified in 1789, the literal language of the Full Faith and Credit Clause provides for a more hierarchical model of federalism. The first provision requires states to extend full faith and credit to the acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states, thereby imposing a uniform standard on the states regarding the treatment of official actions of other states. And the second provision gives Congress the authority to further effectuate the manner in which states must receive and treat out-of-state acts, records, and judgments. Both of these provisions reflect a blueprint for hierarchy in federal-state relations, whereby the states are required to abide by a uniform limitation on their sovereignty in interstate legal disputes and the federal government reigns supreme when it comes to further regulation of this area of interstate relations.

THE MEANING OF FULL FAITH AND CREDIT

The Full Faith and Credit Clause, as with most other constitutional provisions, has been the subject of conflicting interpretations, and despite the seemingly clear language of the clause, there appears to be very little consensus regarding the scope and meaning of the text. Constitutional scholars and legal advocates have reviewed the records from English courts, the Continental Congress, and the Constitutional Convention in an effort to understand the original intent of the provision, but this has resulted in conflicting interpretations. These interpretations can be grouped into two general theories—compact theory and national theory.

Compact theory maintains that the Full Faith and Credit Clause was written with the intent of placing few restrictions on states in their consideration of extraterritorial acts, records, and proceedings. Despite the mandatory-sounding language of the clause, compact theorists claim that the words cannot be taken literally, but instead must be read within the historical context and logical intent of the framers. Viewed in this light, compact theory holds that the clause was never intended to remove the states’ discretion in deciding which law—their own or another state’s—to apply to legal disputes within their own borders. Under this theory, the clause requires states only to admit the relevant acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states into the evidentiary record of a given legal dispute, and to consider such evidence along with other forms of evidence presented. Compact theorists claim that English common law, the debates among the constitutional framers, and judicial interpretations all suggest that the clause was designed to require only evidentiary consideration of other states’ official actions, and not for making extraterritorial acts, records, and judicial proceedings conclusions of law.

National theorists, on the other hand, promote a more literal interpretation of the clause. Under this theory, the clause was designed to form one union out of several independent states by providing a clear national command regarding the manner in which states must interact with each other in interstate legal disputes. National theorists claim that, in most situations, the Full Faith and Credit Clause not only requires states to admit the acts, records, and judgments of other states into evidence, but also requires states to afford these official actions full legal effect as well.

CONGRESSIONAL AND JUDICIAL CONSIDERATION OF THE CLAUSE

Following the ratification of the Constitution, the First Congress did not waste any time exercising its power under the Full Faith and Credit Clause. On February 1, 1790, Congress passed legislation detailing the procedure for authenticating records and judicial proceedings and declaring that, properly authenticated, these records and proceedings would have the same “faith and credit” given to them in every court within the United States, as they have in their originating court. Congress, however, did not include “public acts” in the effects clause of this legislation, and for a considerable time this led to controversy as to whether out-of-state legislative acts were to be afforded full faith and credit. Ultimately, Congress resolved this conflict in 1948 when it amended the 1790 statute to include “acts” in the effects provision (“1948 Act”). Accordingly, under 28 U.S. Code, Section 1738, “Acts, records and judicial proceedings shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory, or Possession from which they are taken.”

(Video) The Constitution of the United States. Article IV. Section 1.

Other examples of congressional action under Article IV include the 1980 Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act, which requires each state to enforce child custody determinations made by other states; the 1994 Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act, which requires states to enforce child support orders made by the child’s home state; and the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which provided an exemption to states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause allowing them to refuse recognition to same-sex marriages solemnized in other states. However, in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Court held, albeit not on Full Faith and Credit grounds, “that there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.” More broadly, the Court declared Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor (2013) and mooted DOMA in Obergefell.

ARTICLE IV, SECTION 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

But despite this legislation, Congress has remained silent on many other areas of law potentially affected by the Full Faith and Credit Clause. There also are exceptions to the Clause. For example, states have not had to recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states. Proposed congressional legislation to require all states to recognize such permits has been very controversial.

More critically, both state and federal courts have regarded the literal language of the Full Faith and Credit Clause and the 1948 Act to be unmanageable and their resulting effects to be “absurd.”

With regard to “public acts,” the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Alaska Packers Association v. Industrial Accident Commission (1935) that “a rigid and literal enforcement of the full faith and credit clause [for acts] . . . would lead to the absurd result that, whenever a conflict arises, the statute of each state must be enforced in the courts of the other, but cannot in its own.” Given the potential for such illogical results, state courts have not strictly abided by the literal mandates of the Full Faith and Credit Clause or the 1948 Act in cases where a conflict exists between the law of the forum state and that of another state. Instead, states have independently developed elaborate and extraconstitutional rules for resolving interstate conflicts of law. These rules, known as conflict-of-law or choice-of-law rules, vary from state to state, and may be applied differently depending on the nature of the legal dispute (tort law, domestic relations, insurance law, etc.). But overall, these rules are a series of doctrines and laws adopted individually by the states that have largely displaced the Full Faith and Credit Clause and the 1948 Act as the governing principles for many interstate conflicts regarding “public acts.”

A similar development occurred with respect to the interstate treatment of records and judgments, as states have applied a less-than-literal application of the clause and the 1948 Act to these extraterritorial actions as well. Instead, under modern theories of full faith and credit, the forum state’s public policy interests have become a central factor for determining whether an out-of-state act, record, or judgment will be effectuated. And in cases where the forum state finds that the recognition of an out-of-state record or judgment, such as a marriage certificate or divorce decree, would violate the forum state’s public policy, courts have denied full faith and credit to these records and proceedings. This approach to full faith and credit generally has been reinforced by federal courts. As Supreme Court Justice Stanley Reed concluded in Griffin v. McCoach (1941), “A state is not required to enforce a law obnoxious to its policy.” The Court has however on various occasions held that a state must enforce final judgments by courts with authority over the subject and the persons involved. In V.L. v. E.L (2016), for example, the Court required Alabama to follow a Georgia court adoption decree to a same-sex couple.

(Video) US Constitution art. IV Sec. I Full Faith and Credit Clause

The so-called public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause is not unique to interstate relations in the United States, but was a legal doctrine originally developed in private international law, a body of law dealing with the rights and obligations of individuals in international transactions. Within this area of law, countries are permitted to refuse recognition to the official actions or decrees of another country in private disputes where the extraterritorial action or decree runs afoul of the forum country’s policy interests.

THE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF FULL FAITH AND CREDIT

The frequent disregard for and inexact application of the Full Faith and Credit Clause has led some legal scholars to suggest that, in conflict-of-law disputes, the Full Faith and Credit Clause applies only when there is a “compelling need” to use it. As a result, states have enjoyed a considerable amount of discretion in deciding whether to enforce the official action of another state, under a strict interpretation and application of the Full Faith and Credit Clause, or whether to deny full faith and credit because the forum state’s interests are better served by applying its own law or public policy. This reality has led some scholars to observe that the Full Faith and Credit Clause means “almost nothing” and that state courts can easily avoid what little it does mean.

In the end, the general disregard for the Full Faith and Credit Clause has resulted in a model of federalism that is far less hierarchical in nature than the text of Article IV would suggest. And those concerned with the expansion of federal authority over the states, which has occurred under the Necessary and Proper, Supremacy, and Commerce Clauses, find an inverted flow of authority under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, where state sovereignty has in most cases reigned supreme.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Lea Brilmayer, Conflict of Laws: Foundations and Future Directions (Boston: Little, Brown, 1991); David E. Engdahl, “The Classic Rule of Faith and Credit,” Yale Law Journal 118 (2009): 1584-1954; Robert H. Jackson, Full Faith and Credit: The Lawyer’s Clause of the Constitution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1945); Douglas Laycock, “Equal Citizens of Equal and Territorial States: The Constitutional Foundations of Choice of Law,” Columbia Law Review 92 (1992): 249–337; and Russell J. Weintraub, “Who’s Afraid of Constitutional Limitations on Choice of Law?” Hofstra Law Review 10 (1981): 17.

(Video) Article IV Explained

John P. Feldmeier. Updated by Stephen L. Schechter (June 2018)

SEE ALSO: Citizenship

FAQs

What is the Full Faith and Credit Clause in Article IV Section I? ›

Section 1 Full Faith and Credit Clause

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

What is the Full Faith and Credit Clause Article IV Section 1 )? How does it protect the rights of citizens from state power? ›

The Full Faith and Credit Clause is a constitutional provision regulating how courts deal with rulings from other courts and jurisdictions. In particular, the clause states that all courts must honor the judgments, legislative actions, and records from other courts, including out-of-state courts.

What does the phrase full faith and credit mean in Article IV? ›

Article IV addresses something different: the states' relations with each other, sometimes called “horizontal federalism.” Its first section, the Full Faith and Credit Clause, requires every state, as part of a single nation, to give a certain measure of respect to every other state's laws and institutions.

What is the Full Faith and Credit Clause What are some exceptions to this rule? ›

What does the Full Faith and Credit Clause mean? Restated, Article IV requires that each state recognize the laws of every other state. The only exception to these rule concerns laws that violate the public policy of another state.

What does Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution mean? ›

Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

What is full faith and credit give an example? ›

The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that the judicial proceedings of one state are generally recognized by all the other states. If someone is married in California, for example, they are still considered married in Massachusetts. This clause prevents one state from ignoring the valid legal acts of another state.

Which best explains the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

The best explanation for the full faith and credit clause is below: Full faith and the Credit clause deals with the constitutional actions between the different states. The Full Faith and Credit Clause administers with incarcerated individuals present in the various states.

What is the essential purpose of the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

The Constitutional clause regarding full faith and credit helps to ensure that court decisions in one state will be honored in other states. The clause is primarily used to enforce judgments.

What is full faith and credit and why did the Framers believe it was important to the Republic? ›

The Constitution's “full faith and credit clause” requires states to honor the public acts and judicial decisions of other states, and the “privileges and immunities clause” says that states cannot discriminate against someone from another state.

How does the Full Faith and Credit Clause affect individuals? ›

The Full Faith and Credit clause states that the courts must honor out-of-state laws, regulations, and judgments. Thus, if a couple is married under the laws of one state, the marriage must be given full faith and credit in all other states.

Which of the following situations is most applicable to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

Which of the following situations is most applicable to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? A crime committed in international waters, and tried in a U.S. court.

Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause apply to criminal or civil matters? ›

Full faith and credit laws generally apply only to civil judgments. Full Faith and Credit Clause is invoked mainly to enforce judgments.

What are three areas in which states give full faith and credit to citizens of other states? ›

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.

What is meant by the term full faith and credit? ›

Full faith and credit refers to the full borrowing power of a government that pledges to fulfill its payment obligations in a timely manner. The U.S. Treasury issues bills, notes, and bonds as a means of borrowing money from the public to fund the government's capital projects.

What bonds are backed by full faith and credit? ›

What are Treasury Securities? United States Treasury securities, often simply called Treasuries, are debt obligations issued by the United States Government and secured by the full faith and credit (the power to tax and borrow) of the United States.

What is the primary purpose of Article IV? ›

Article Four of the United States Constitution outlines the relationship between the various states, as well as the relationship between each state and the United States federal government. It also empowers Congress to admit new states and administer the territories and other federal lands.

When was Article IV of the Constitution written? ›

There are four subsections to Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which was signed in convention on Sept. 17, 1787, and ratified by the states on June 21, 1788.

What does Article IV Section 2 mean? ›

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

What is the meaning of full faith? ›

noun. the obligation under Article IV of the U.S. Constitution for each state to recognize the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.

Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause apply to U.S. territories? ›

Such Acts, records and judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken.

Which is a true statement about the Full Faith and Credit Clause from Article IV of the Constitution Brainly? ›

The Full Faith and Credit Clause deals with legal proceedings between states. It ensures that the laws of one state are respected in another state.

How many of the thirteen states needed to approve a law before it could be passed under the Articles of Confederation? ›

Congress needed 9 of 13 states to pass any laws. Requiring this high supermajority made it very difficult to pass any legislation that would affect all 13 states.

Why did the framers believe a new Constitution was necessary? ›

The Founding Fathers, the framers of the Constitution, wanted to form a government that did not allow one person to have too much authority or control. While under the rule of the British king they learned that this could be a bad system.

Why did the founding fathers think it necessary to create the Articles of Confederation? ›

From the beginning of the American Revolution, Congress felt the need for a stronger union and a government powerful enough to defeat Great Britain. During the early years of the war this desire became a belief that the new nation must have a constitutional order appropriate to its republican character.

Why must states honor the laws of other states? ›

Among the ways in which the Constitution united the separate states into a nation was through the “full faith and credit” clause, which requires the courts in one state to recognize the laws, records, and judicial decisions of the other states.

Does full faith and credit apply to federal courts? ›

Full Faith and Credit in Federal Courts

The federal courts are bound to give to the judgments of the state courts the same faith and credit that the courts of one state are bound to give to the judgments of the courts of her sister states.

Which of the following scenarios is prohibited under the obligations of contracts clause? ›

Which of the following scenarios is prohibited under the Obligations of Contracts Clause? A state government impairing an individual's private contract.

What is an example of privileges and immunities? ›

Examples of privileges and immunities include life, liberty, and property, but also include the right to sue, the right to protection of a federal Marshall, and the right to run for federal office and vote in federal elections.

What does the Fourth Amendment protect against? ›

The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.

Can Congress overrule state laws that conflict with federal statutes? ›

​When Does Federal Law Preempt State Law? The U.S. Constitution declares that federal law is “the supreme law of the land.” As a result, when a federal law conflicts with a state or local law, the federal law will supersede the other law or laws.

How many states have to vote for the Constitution to approve it? ›

The process set out in the Constitution for its ratification provided for much popular debate in the States. The Constitution would take effect once it had been ratified by nine of the thirteen State legislatures; unanimity was not required.

What does full faith and credit in Article IV mean? ›

Article IV addresses something different: the states' relations with each other, sometimes called “horizontal federalism.” Its first section, the Full Faith and Credit Clause, requires every state, as part of a single nation, to give a certain measure of respect to every other state's laws and institutions.

What does Article 4 of the Constitution mean in simple terms? ›

Article IV Relationships Between the States

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Which clause requires states to treat people from other states equally? ›

The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution states that "the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." This clause protects fundamental rights of individual citizens and restrains state efforts to discriminate ...

What is an example of full faith and credit? ›

The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that the judicial proceedings of one state are generally recognized by all the other states. If someone is married in California, for example, they are still considered married in Massachusetts. This clause prevents one state from ignoring the valid legal acts of another state.

What are the two exceptions to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

What does the Full Faith and Credit Clause mean? Restated, Article IV requires that each state recognize the laws of every other state. The only exception to these rule concerns laws that violate the public policy of another state.

Why was the Full Faith and Credit Clause created? ›

This clause was included by the original framers of the Constitution in order to assist in promoting the unification of the U.S. The Full Faith and Credit Clause regulates how courts deal with other rulings from other jurisdictions and courts.

How many I bonds can I buy a year? ›

In any one calendar year, you may buy up to $10,000 in Series EE electronic savings bonds AND up to $10,000 in Series I electronic savings bonds for yourself as owner of the bonds. That is in addition to the amount you can spend on buying savings bonds for a child or as gifts.

Are EE bonds a good investment? ›

Series EE bonds are a type of low-risk U.S. savings bond that are guaranteed to double in value after 20 years. Because they are issued by the U.S. Treasury with a 30-year term, they are an excellent choice for those who are seeking long-term, ultra-low-risk investments.

Are bonds a good investment in 2022? ›

Yes, bonds have had a tough run in 2022, but with currently higher yields, if you're optimistic on inflation, bonds may make sense in your portfolio.

What is the essential purpose of the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

The Constitutional clause regarding full faith and credit helps to ensure that court decisions in one state will be honored in other states. The clause is primarily used to enforce judgments.

What is a full faith and credit bond? ›

Full faith and credit refers to the full borrowing power of a government that pledges to fulfill its payment obligations in a timely manner. The U.S. Treasury issues bills, notes, and bonds as a means of borrowing money from the public to fund the government's capital projects.

What is the importance of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution as it relates to family law? ›

The Full Faith and Credit clause states that the courts must honor out-of-state laws, regulations, and judgments. Thus, if a couple is married under the laws of one state, the marriage must be given full faith and credit in all other states.

What is the main purpose behind the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV? ›

The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution states that "the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." This clause protects fundamental rights of individual citizens and restrains state efforts to discriminate ...

Which of the following situations is most applicable to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? ›

Which of the following situations is most applicable to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? A crime committed in international waters, and tried in a U.S. court.

Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause apply to criminal or civil matters? ›

Full faith and credit laws generally apply only to civil judgments. Full Faith and Credit Clause is invoked mainly to enforce judgments.

What is full faith and credit and why did the Framers believe it was important to the Republic? ›

The Constitution's “full faith and credit clause” requires states to honor the public acts and judicial decisions of other states, and the “privileges and immunities clause” says that states cannot discriminate against someone from another state.

What bonds are backed by full faith and credit? ›

What are Treasury Securities? United States Treasury securities, often simply called Treasuries, are debt obligations issued by the United States Government and secured by the full faith and credit (the power to tax and borrow) of the United States.

Which type of debt issuance has the full faith and credit of the entity? ›

Debt Types

There are three distinct types of debt that can be issued by local government: General obligation (GO) debt is secured by the full faith and credit of the local government issuing the debt. The municipality pledges its tax revenues unconditionally to pay the interest and principal on the debt as it matures.

Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause apply to U.S. territories? ›

Such Acts, records and judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken.

What is Full Faith & credit and how does it impact you? ›

What Is The Full Faith And Credit Clause? Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution is known as the “Full Faith and Credit Clause.” In short, it requires that states honor the court judgements of other states.

What are three areas in which states give full faith and credit to citizens of other states? ›

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.

Why must states honor the laws of other states? ›

Among the ways in which the Constitution united the separate states into a nation was through the “full faith and credit” clause, which requires the courts in one state to recognize the laws, records, and judicial decisions of the other states.

What types of actions are not protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause? ›

The privileges and immunities clause is designed to protect citizens of the United States, particularly protecting the citizens' right to travel between states. This clause is applied to all individual citizens of the United States but does not apply to commercial enterprises across state borders.

How do the full faith and credit clause and Privileges and Immunities Clause work together? ›

States must give “full faith and credit” to the laws of other states, give citizens from every state the same privileges and immunities, and extradite fugitives who cross state lines.

What limitation is put on admitting new states? ›

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the ...

Videos

1. What is the Purpose of Article IV? [No. 86]
(The Federalist Society)
2. Article IV (Sections 1-4) U.S. Constitution
(Tinfoil Tidbits)
3. Full faith and credit:Privleges and immunities
(Brek Chiles)
4. The full faith and credit clause
(Hannah Jenkins)
5. Full Faith and Credit Clause
(The Business Professor)
6. Full Faith & Credit Clause
(Tavish Whiting)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Golda Nolan II

Last Updated: 11/24/2022

Views: 5974

Rating: 4.8 / 5 (78 voted)

Reviews: 93% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Golda Nolan II

Birthday: 1998-05-14

Address: Suite 369 9754 Roberts Pines, West Benitaburgh, NM 69180-7958

Phone: +522993866487

Job: Sales Executive

Hobby: Worldbuilding, Shopping, Quilting, Cooking, Homebrewing, Leather crafting, Pet

Introduction: My name is Golda Nolan II, I am a thoughtful, clever, cute, jolly, brave, powerful, splendid person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.