It is dismaying that the Rhode Island Supreme Court has ruled against letting people of the same sex who were legally married in Massachusetts divorce in the Ocean State.

The ruling essentially locks homosexual couples into marriage in Rhode Island unless one or both members of the marriage move back to Massachusetts and institute divorce proceedings there. That is not equal justice under the law. After all, heterosexual couples who were married in the Bay State are allowed to divorce in Rhode Island.

The court, in its 3-2 ruling, noted that marriage in Rhode Island is repeatedly defined in state laws as being between a man and a woman. True, but the state has long recognized legal marriages performed in other states whose criteria for legality are different from its own. Take, for instance, that Ocean State courts have accepted marriages in other states involving people who would not have met the minimum age for marriage in Rhode Island.

Indeed, the “full faith and credit” clause of the U.S. Constitution, which mandates that states accept the validity of laws in the other states, would seem to mandate that the Ocean State accept the legal validity of marriages made elsewhere in America.

The Rhode Island General Assembly must quickly enact a law stipulating that, purely for the purposes of divorce proceedings here, all marriages in Massachusetts (or other states that in the future follow its lead and let homosexual couples legally marry) will be recognized as legally valid in Rhode Island. That would at least provide justice for married couples who move to Rhode Island from Massachusetts. And it would comply clearly with the U.S. Constitution.

Of course, the larger issue is legalizing gay marriage in Rhode Island itself. The state would be better off — and would be doing the right and just thing — to extend full marriage rights to its homosexual residents. But until that day comes, the state should at the very least recognize legal marriages elsewhere for the purposes of divorce proceedings. That can and should be done quickly by enacting a clear statute on the issue — in the upcoming session.