Couple Things

Item: DeSantis spokeswoman belatedly registers as agent of foreign politician Christina Pushaw’s disclosure of work for Mikheil Saakashvili came after contact from the Justice Department, her attorney said.

This comes after the "the Justice Department sued Steve Wynn, a developer and Republican megadonor, seeking to compel him to register as an agent of China."  

I saw a few people handwaving the importance of the latter, especially since it was "only" a disclosure rule and no real penalty was at stake.  But, having people's foreign lobby work being on record in not trivial.  Ditto disclosure rules in general.  Any one instance is of limited importance.  The whole united system in place has an important role in keeping track of people, money, and institutions in general. 

#NEW: Last week, the NYS Senate and Assembly passed my bill with @SandyGalef to allow lay individuals to be designated as one-day marriage officiants.

Once signed into law, New York couples will have the opportunity to have a loved one officiate their marriage. pic.twitter.com/wqpJjQsJvD

— Alessandra Biaggi (@SenatorBiaggi) June 7, 2022

I have covered this issue over the years.  New York allows the clergy and ethical society officials to officiate marriages.  

But, the rules in place define the religious institutions that apply in a way that certain judges do not think apply to online minister types. The rules also single out certain ethical societies.  Most continue to use such online ministers, but over the years, that led to in a few cases lawsuits. And, in at least one New York case, the marriage wasn't upheld. 

I think the whole thing is constitutionally deficient on various grounds.  It is vague, breaches religious liberty (both favoring certain religions and burdening free exercise), and violates individual right to marry as they deem fit.  The best thing to do is clean up the whole law, including not favoring certain ethical societies (a problem I have seen no one address) and not trying to determine what religion counts enough. 

This bill -- which I doubt Gov. Hochul has any issue with -- makes a smaller tweak. Using a procedure in place elsewhere, it will allow (the details pending -- it will be administrative regulation thing) a person to be a secular officiant for one time.  I assume if they want to do so again, they can, but they will just have to go through the procedure again.  Not knowing exactly how it will be done makes me unsure exactly. 

Which is fine as far as it goes.  People surely want to preside over marriages and the "I'm a minister now" thing is really often just a practical thing.  That's how the rules in place require it.  This provides a clear way to do so that firmly is legal.  The thing is far from totally academic; there has been litigation over the issue in multiple states. 

I realize making big changes is complicated. Still.  It would have been best just to reform the law in general.  There are certain people who are let's say Universal Life Church ministers.  They do not only want to ordain online to preside over a single wedding.  It is not really reasonable to require them to act differently here.  

Still, as I have said in the past, I do think it appropriate (and this has constitutional connotations -- most probably state constitutional principles too) to allow a person to have a secular option here.  It is a helpful means to provide for the happiness of the public.  Again, the number of cases these ministers pop up in NYT wedding announcements shows they are popular. 

Some years back, I registered (for life apparently) as a marriage officiant in New York City as a Universal Life Minister.  So, I'm somewhat personally involved here.   I don't think this law suddenly makes it so that such ministers do not count.  Again, it's a limited bill, and you surely can imagine an argument a given minister is not secular.