Williams v. North Carolina

Background

Two North Carolina residents left the State, filed for divorce in Nevada after short stays, and obtained Nevada divorce decrees while the absent spouses did not appear in Nevada. The two divorcees then married each other in Nevada and returned to North Carolina, where they were indicted and convicted for bigamous cohabitation because North Carolina refused to treat the Nevada divorces as ending the earlier marriages.

Reasoning

The central question was whether North Carolina had to recognize the Nevada divorce decrees. The Court examined the Constitution’s command that states give full faith and credit to sister‑state judgments and the federal law that implements it. The majority concluded the earlier Haddock rule was wrong and held that a divorce decree valid and effective in the state that issued it must be recognized by other states when the issuing state had jurisdiction and observance of procedural due process. The Court assumed for this case that the petitioners had a bona fide Nevada domicil and reversed the convictions because the jury’s general verdict might have rested on a constitutionally invalid ground.

Real world impact

After this decision, states have less power to refuse recognition of divorces that a sister state validly granted to domiciliaries, even if the forum state’s policy on divorce differs. People who obtain short‑term or tourist divorces in another state may obtain broader recognition at home when the issuing forum had proper residence and process. The Court’s ruling does not resolve every question about sham residencies or other specific jurisdictional facts; it remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Frankfurter agreed but emphasized judicial limits and that Congress could address uniformity. Justices Murphy and Jackson dissented, arguing for stronger state authority to protect local marriage policy and questioning whether the Nevada stays established true domicil.