Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, notes that a 2005 Texas constitutional amendment intended to make same-sex marriage or domestic partnership illegal and impossible in the state, is so poorly written and presented that it potentially renders all marriage in Texas after 2005 null and void. The amendment, which was duly approved by the Texas Legislature, and then overwhelmingly ratified by Texas voters, asserts first that "marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." But then Subsection B asserts:

This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

As Radnofsky, (a high-powered attorney at the much respected Houston law firm Vinson & Elkins until her 2006 retirement) points out "You do not have to have a fancy law degree to read this and understand what it plainly says."

The problem, of course, is in the statement the state or a subdivision of the state "may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage. Marriage is, in fact, identical and similar to, well, marriage.

In other words, the amendment prohibits marriage as a legal status identical to, and similar to, itself.