As I said when the northeast was originally considering group marriages I oppose them, but I'm not convinced this is the senate's job.
A Federal law requiring Regions to make changes to their marriage laws would also be unconstitutional under Article I, Section 6, Clause 7.
It almost certainly wouldn't. Or rather, it might, depending on which way the court was feeling on the morning it decided the case.
As I've said before, the constitution is so poorly worded that the senate can make a case for any law it passes as falling under it's powers, and this is no different.
Perhaps more interestingly, could you not make an argument that there can't be variation between regions on marriage because the point of the senate is to establish uniform ones?
Thankfully JCL is here to solve this dilemma with the catch all solution of devolving the power to the regions, in a similar way to the moderate heroes who proclaim their solution to any problem to be leaving it to the states (I personally feel that legalising murder is morally repugnant but it should be left up to the states 
)
@Bore, the federal government should've never been given power regarding this matter. As a matter of my personal views regarding marriage, they are known quite clear and they are not well liked in Atlasia. That would include many Federalists being in profound dissent with my view. I'm no moderate hero. I once had Cassius's view for a federal marriage amendment banning SSM. In the past few years I realized a centralized way is not the most effective way to go about preserving or changing laws regarding wedge social issues. That doesn't mean I'm not sympathetic to Cassius's view because I once held it.
