State bans on cohabitation continue to hang on

Sunday, 26 March 2000

http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/000326NILLEGAL-COHABITAT.html

By Jim Yardley
© 2000 The New York Times
PERALTA, N.M. Richard Pitcher and Kimberly Henry began their courtship in January with a lunch that led to dinner that incited three dizzy weeks and talk of marriage. But his second divorce was still fresh, and her first marriage had been a disaster, so they decided to try a road test of sorts. They moved in together.
He cleaned out a dresser for her clothes, and she brought her stereo and her books. Everything seemed to be progressing nicely until the summons arrived in the mail charging them with violating Article 30-10-2 of the New Mexico criminal code, otherwise known as unlawful cohabitation. First offenders get a warning; repeat offenders could spend six months in jail.
"I just couldn't believe it," Pitcher said. "I was shocked."
In many places these days, living together carries less of a moral stain than smoking, but in New Mexico, as in Arizona, it is against the law. Few New Mexicans seem to realize this, and even fewer of the state's law-enforcement officials have ever chosen to uphold the statute, perhaps for lack of jail space. But one person familiar with the law is Pitcher's second ex-wife, and in February she filed a complaint.
In New Mexico, the statute is a reminder that state legal codes are like old attics: Almost anything can be in there, and cleaning them out is never easy. In Oklahoma, for example, a person can be sentenced to 30 days in jail for "injuring" fruit, melons or flowers. In North Carolina, swearing remains prohibited in all 100 counties except two at opposite ends of the state, for balance.
The National Conference of State Legislatures has no details on how many states have laws against cohabitation, but there are at least a few. In Arizona, the Legislature rebuffed efforts last month to repeal its own 80-year-old cohabitation law after a committee chairman described it as a bulwark against the "decaying fabric of society." Massachusetts, on the other hand, chose to risk decay. In 1987, it repealed its ban on "lewdly and lasciviously associating and cohabitating without the benefit of marriage." The law had been on the books since 1784.
These laws are often just statutory reminders of bygone eras until, of course, a person is charged with breaking one. That rarely happens since officials regard such laws as unenforceable. About a decade ago, a sheriff in southern New Mexico announced plans to enforce the cohabitation law, but an irritated citizenry soon convinced him otherwise.
Yet Charles E. Knoblauch, a lawyer representing Henry, noted that private citizens in New Mexico have considerable latitude in filing misdemeanor criminal charges. Under state law, a person need only swear out a complaint with the police and pay a fee to charge someone with a misdemeanor. No police investigation is required.
"For $25, you can make someone's life a living hell," Knoblauch said.

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------