---
title: Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I. Recognition of marriage.
collection: code
id: ga-const:art-i-sec-iv-para-i
cite_as: Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-iv-para-i
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-iv-para-i.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-iv-para-i/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=f5de823e_0#page=779
date: 2016
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/index.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-iii-para-iii.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-ii-sec-i-para-i.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: CONSTITUTION OF THE / BILL OF RIGHTS / MARRIAGE
editorial_note_written: 2026-09-13
---

# Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I. Recognition of marriage.

A constitution provision shown as in force is in force as printed in the volume. A court decision can make a printed provision unenforceable without changing the volume, and the volume does not record that.

(a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.

(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties’ respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship. (Ga. Const. 1983, Art. 1, § 4, Para. 1, approved by Ga. L. 2004, p. 1111, § 1/SR 595.)

## Georgia Commons note

In Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), the United States Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires every state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a same-sex marriage lawfully licensed in another state. This paragraph is therefore not enforceable, although the volume prints it as in force. This note is written by Georgia Commons and is not part of the official record.

Written 2026-09-13.

## Editor's Notes

The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 2004, p. 1111, § 1) which added Section IV and this Paragraph was approved by a majority of the qualified voters voting at the general election held on November 2, 2004.

## Law Reviews

For article, ‘‘A Holy Secular Institution,’’ see 58 Emory L.J. 1123 (2009).

For article, ‘‘Polygamous Unions? Charting the Contours of Marriage Law’s Frontier,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 1669 (2015). For article, ‘‘Why Two In One Flesh? The Western Case for Monogamy Over Polygamy,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 1675 (2015). For article, ‘‘Should Civil Marriage Be Opened Up to Multiple Parties,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 1747 (2015). For article, ‘‘Three May Not Be a Crowd: The Case for a Constitutional Right to Plural Marriage,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 1977 (2015). For article, ‘‘The Evolution of Plural Parentage Applying Vulner-ability Theory to Polygamy and Same Sex Marriage,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 2047 (2015). For article, ‘‘Polygyny and Violence Against Women,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 1767 (2015).

For comment, ‘‘L’Amour for Four: Polygyny, Polyamory, and the State’s Compelling Economic Interest in Normative Monogamy,’’ see 64 Emory L.J. 2093 (2015).

## Constitutionality.

Prohibition against recognizing same-sex unions as entitled to the benefits of marriage was not ‘‘dissimilar and discordant’’ to the objective of reserving the status of marriage and its attendant benefits exclusively to unions of man and woman; Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I did not violate the multiple-subject matter rule. Perdue v. O’Kelley, 280 Ga. 732, 632 S.E.2d 110 (2006).