Adding historical context...

Oh gosh, if you want historical context: The law was passed by a legislature led by William Claude Jones. Jones, among other things, married 5 times, including to a 12 year old. Got a 14 year old pregnant. Abandoned more than one of them. Moved from state to state as he was dis-reputed in each, leaving behind a trail of tears, if I may misappropriate a common piece of vernacular.

Here’s a trifling paragraph from a disturbing history:

 

His next wife was a girl whose name was believed to be Maria v. del Refugio, 
writes L. Boyd Finch, the author of the journal article. New Mexico’s delegate 
to Washington, Miguel Otero, was bothered by the union. He “declared that the 
bride was twelve years old,” Finch writes, “and that Jones had ‘abducted’ her.” 
Otero petitioned President James Buchanan to fire Jones for the moral failing, 
but Jones resigned instead.  

Gift link:
https://wapo.st/3TWUY8z

A real piece of work, that, but then in the 1800’s such cavorting with underage women and other sorts of behavior horriblese wasn’t seen with the same eyes as today. Which makes it all the more wonderous that the stacked-and-loaded Arizona Supreme Court thought reinstituting a law from that era, passed by a legislature led by this man, was a good idea.

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.