I'm pretty sure every DW couple has this conversation. We had friends get legally married 10 years in Mexico and they had no issues with getting things translated and their marriage recognize in Minnesota. (they're getting divorced now and the Mexico wedding is not causing any issues).
When we picked Mexico, we were fully informed of requirements and added costs (about $1000) to be legally married.Now that guests are booking and the spending is real, we're starting to reconsider. Mainly because it would save us money, we wouldn't have to arrive on Mon for a Friday wedding, no blood tests, no extra fees. the MN license is $150 vs. $1000 in Mexico. It would save us about $2000 total to have a symbolic ceremony in Mexico.
So I have very informally socialized this idea with my MOH and one very, very close friend - I joked about about the extra hassle (arriving 3 days early/blood tests/etc) and casually mentioned 'yeah, we're thinking of getting married in MN first'. Both said "I would feel hurt and annoyed if you did that". When I asked them to explain- they said they are spending all this money to go to Mexico to see us get married, they want to participate in the 'real' event. Yes, the legal ceremony in MN is 'just paperwork', but my MOH feels the 'paperwork' is part of the real event. Both said they don't want to go to Mexico to watch a 'vow renewal' a week after we got legally married in MN.
This is where I struggle - how does this impact our guests. my FI and I would totally approach the courthouse ceremony as 'paperwork' and totally view Mexico as 'the real event'. But our guests sound like they may be hurt and bothered if we did this. We have 60 guests flying in for the wedding for us, the ceremony is for them too.
IDK - we'll probably stick with a legal wedding in Mexico. Or we may get married in MN first, but not change our arrival/departure dates, and just not tell anyone - we'll only save on the license fees and the translation hassles.