QUESTION PRESENTED
               Whether M~, the claimant, and the J~, the deceased number holder (NH), who were married
                  in Barcelona, Spain on January 26, 2006, are considered married for purposes of determining
                  the claimant’s entitlement to benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (Act).
               
               SHORT ANSWER
               Yes, assuming the documents provided to the agency evidence that the marriage was
                  recorded in the civil registry, the claimant qualifies as the NH’s surviving spouse
                  (widower). Accordingly, if the claimant also meets the other criteria for entitlement,
                  the agency should find that he is entitled to Title II benefits on the NH’s record.
               
               BACKGROUND
               The claimant and the NH entered into a same-sex marriage on January 26, 2006, in Barcelona,
                  Spain. The NH died on December 16, 2012 in Barcelona, Spain. The claimant continues
                  to reside in Spain. On April 11, 2013, the claimant filed for Social Security benefits
                  and the lump sum payment as the NH’s widower. You requested a legal opinion regarding
                  whether the claimant and the NH are considered to have been married for purposes of
                  determining the claimant’s entitlement to benefits under Title II of the Act.
               
               LEGAL STANDARDS
               Federal Law
               Generally, an individual is entitled to widow’s or widower’s benefits if he or she
                  (1) is the insured’s widow or widower and the marital relationship lasted at least
                  nine months before the insured died; (2) files an application; (3) is at least 60
                  years old; (4) is not entitled to an old-age benefit that is equal to or larger than
                  the insured person’s primary insurance amount; and (5) is not currently married. Sections
                  202(e), 202(f) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 404.335. Similarly, upon the death of a person
                  who died as a fully or currently insured individual under the Act, a lump-sum death
                  payment may be paid to the widow or widower of the insured who was living in the same
                  household at the time of death. Section 202(i) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 404.391.
               
               Here, at the time of the NH’s death, the NH was domiciled in Spain. Therefore, we
                  apply the laws the District of Columbia courts would apply to determine whether a
                  valid marriage existed at the time of the NH’s death. See section 216(h)(1)(A)(i) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 404.345, POMS GN 00210.066B.2.a. Under the law of the District of Columbia, the validity of a marriage is determined
                  by the law of the jurisdiction where the marriage was entered into. See McConnell v. McConnell, 99 F. Supp. 493, 494 (D.D.C. 1951); Carr v. Varr, 82 F. Supp. 398 (D.D.C. 1949); Gerardi v. Gerardi, 69 F. Supp. 296 (D.D.C. 1946). The only exception is when the marriage is in violation
                  of strong public policy of the District of Columbia. Hitchens v. Hitchens, 47 F. Supp. 73, 74 (D.D.C. 1942). As pertinent here, the District of Columbia began
                  formally recognizing as valid same-sex marriages entered into in other jurisdictions
                  beginning on July 7, 2009. See Section 1287a of the Jury and Marriage Amendment Act of 2009, D.C. Code § 46-405.01
                  (“A marriage legally entered into in another jurisdiction between 2 persons of the
                  same sex that is recognized as valid in that jurisdiction, that is not expressly prohibited
                  . . . , and has not been deemed illegal . . . , shall be recognized as a marriage
                  in the District.”). Accordingly, it is clear that from July 7, 2009, the recognition
                  of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions does not appear to violate
                  a strong public policy of the District of Columbia. We therefore consider whether
                  the claimant’s and the NH’s marriage is valid under Spanish law.
               
               Spanish Law 
               On July 2, 2005, the Civil Code of Spain was amended to include the civil marriage
                  entered into by individuals of the same sex as a legal marriage. [4] [5] Código Civil art. 44 (B.O.E. July 25, 1889, as amended). Same-sex marriage has the same legal
                  requirements and effect as heterosexual marriage. Id. Applicants for a marriage license must provide proof that they have lived in Spain
                  for at least two years (Reglamento de la Ley de Registro Civil (RLRC) art. 240.5),
                  a current valid passport if the applicant is not a Spanish national (RLRC art. 258),
                  an original birth certificate (RLRC art. 241), proof of legal capacity to enter into
                  marriage (RLRC art. 240.3), and any applicable marriage, divorce, annulment, or death
                  certificates (Ley de 8 de junio de 1957 sobre Registro Civil art. 76 (B.O.E. June
                  10, 1957, 7537)).
               
               The marriage has full legal effect when it is recorded in the civil registry; at that
                  time, the officer of the civil registry issues a marriage certificate stating the
                  date, time, and place of the marriage. Código Civil arts. 49, 51.
               
               DISCUSSION
               It is clear that foreign same-sex marriages had been legal in the District of Columbia
                  since July 7, 2009. Thus, we can conclude that at the time of the NH’s death on December
                  16, 2012, the District of Columbia would have recognized the marriage between the
                  claimant and NH as valid, as long as the marriage is valid under Spanish law.
               
               The translation of the documents provided to our office state that the marriage of
                  the claimant and the NH took place on January 26, 2000. However, the translation provided
                  does not state when the marriage was recorded in the civil registry. [6] We have no indication that the marriage did not meet the Spanish legal criteria for
                  a valid marriage. However, under Spanish law, the marriage has full legal effect when
                  it is recorded in the civil registry; at that time, the officer of the civil registry
                  issues a marriage certificate stating the date, time, and place of the marriage. Código Civil arts. 49, 51. Therefore, the agency must confirm that there is evidence that
                  an officer of the civil registry recorded the marriage in the civil register in order
                  for the agency to find that the marriage is valid and has full legal effect under
                  Spanish law.
               
               CONCLUSION
               The District of Columbia will recognize a same-sex marriage that occurred in Spain
                  if the marriage was valid under Spanish law. Here, we have evidence that a marriage
                  occurred, but it is unclear if we have evidence of when the marriage was recorded
                  in the civil registry. If the civil registry recordation evidence is shown, the agency
                  could find the Claimant and NH had a valid marriage under Spanish law at the time
                  of the NH’s death. If the marriage is valid under Spanish law, the court of the District
                  of Columbia would also recognize it as valid. As such, the marriage could be recognized
                  for purposes of determining Claimant’s entitlement to benefits as the NH’s surviving
                  spouse (widower).