Arizona doesn't get to mandate gun laws within another state. Arizona does not have the authority to mandate that Vermont must do that, that and the other to issue a weapons permit to carry a gun in Vermont. Arizona does have the authority to define the requirements for carrying a gun in Arizona.
The act is controlled by the State in which the action occurs. If you are in Vermont, you are under their jurisdiction and follow their laws and Vermont determines the records required. If you are in Arizona, you are under their jurisdiction and follow their laws.
The act is birth of a child and Hawaii gets to determine how to handle that act within their own State. If the child birth is in Arizona, then Arizona gets to determine how that act is handled in their jurisdiction.
What you are arguing for is that Arizona should mandate on Hawaii how Hawaii documents an act. The jurisdiction is Hawaii, they are controlling authority. The birth (if it occurred in Hawaii) is outside the jurisdiction of Arizona.
When you carry a gun in Arizona, you committing an act under their jurisdiction. When you carry a gun in Vermont, you are committing an act under their jurisdiction. It's kind of hard to be carrying a gun in Vermont when you are standing in Phoenix.
10 USC § 1738.
State and Territorial statutes and judicial proceedings; full faith and credit
"The Acts of the legislature of any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or copies thereof, shall be authenticated by affixing the seal of such State, Territory or Possession thereto.
The records and judicial proceedings of any court of any such State, Territory or Possession, or copies thereof, shall be proved or admitted in other courts within the United States and its Territories and Possessions by the attestation of the clerk and seal of the court annexed, if a seal exists, together with a certificate of a judge of the court that the said attestation is in proper form.
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."
The action that occurred is the birth of a child. The State of Hawaii gets to determine the manner and process by which that action exists in it's records and the structure of the documents that report that event occurring within their jurisdiction. Not another State, especially when that other State is mandating that the documents produced by Hawaii must contain irrelevant information as to the issue at hand. The name of the hospital and who or who wasn't in the delivery room is irrelevant to the central question - did the birth occur in the United States. How that action is documented in Hawaii, is up to Hawaii - not Arizona.
>>>>
Aren't you the one that mentioned the Full Faith and Credit Clause?.
The Full Faith and Credit ClauseArticle IV, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitutionprovides that the various states must recognize legislative acts, public records, and judicial decisions of the other states within the United States.
Aren't gun laws legislative acts?
And what's the one after the red one?
![]()