NJ Court hands down mixed ruling

The decision in the New Jersey marriage equality case was just announced. It’s similar to the Vermont ruling: Same sex couples are entitled to a legally recognized union defined by the legislature, but implementing marriage equality is “a matter left to the democratic process.” 56% of New Jersey voters support full marriage equality for gay couples.

The Court had this to say:

Although plaintiffs rely on the federal cases to support the argument that they have a fundamental right to marry under our State Constitution, those cases fall far short of establishing a fundamental right to same-sex marriage “deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people of this State.” Despite the rich diversity of this State, the tolerance and goodness of its people, and the many recent advances made by gays and lesbians toward achieving social acceptance and equality under the law, the Court cannot find that the right to same-sex marriage is a fundamental right under our constitution.

Fine. Let the legislature do its job.

Summary of opinion
Washington Post

Equality Virginia Responds to New Jersey Marriage Ruling To Provide Marriage Fairness or Civil Unions

(Richmond, October 25) – Today the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that gay couples have a right to equal benefits and the same protections as married couples, but left it up to the legislature to declare whether those rights and benefits would be encompassed in marriage fairness, or in creating civil unions with the same rights and benefits of marriage.

“Ruling that all couples should be treated equally under the law under the New Jersey Constitution will offer protections for those families who have struggled to care for each other and their children, which is an important step,” said Dyana Mason, Equality Virginia Executive Director. “Basically, the ruling says gay couples should be provided equal rights, but don’t inherently have a right to call it ‘marriage’ as defined by that state.”

In its decision, the court stated, “The Court holds that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, committed same-sex couples must be afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to same-sex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.”

They also ordered the New Jersey legislature to either “amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples, or it could create a separate statutory structure, such as a civil union” within 180 days.

In 2000 the Vermont Supreme Court ruled in a similar fashion. In that case, the legislature chose to enact civil unions for same-sex couples, becoming the first state in the nation to formally recognize gay and lesbian relationships with a legal status.

“This decision does not impact Virginia’s laws since it is based on the New Jersey Constitution. Here, rather than moving forward and recognizing the inherent rights of all Virginians our elected officials chose instead to support an effort that will write discrimination in our Bill of Rights and prevent relationship recognition for all unmarried couples in the state,” said Mason.

The New Jersey case was filed in June 2002, by Lambda Legal on behalf of seven same-sex couples seeking the right to marry. In November 2003, a New Jersey Superior judge dismissed the case, Lewis et. al. v. Harris, saying that the state constitution does not guarantee same-sex couples that right. The appropriate forum to change marriage laws is the state Legislature, the judge ruled.

An intermediate appellate court upheld the dismissal in June 2005. The case was appealed to the state Supreme Court and arguments took place on Feb. 15, 2006.

According to a 2006 Zogby poll, 56% of New Jersey residents support allowing same-sex couples to marry and 67% oppose putting an amendment on the ballot to deny gay couples the right to marry.

Currently, Massachusetts is the only state that recognizes the rights of gay and lesbian couples to marry. Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain have also extended marriage fairness, with many other countries providing some other form of relationship recognition.

This entry was posted in Advocacy, Press releases and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to NJ Court hands down mixed ruling

  1. Pingback: Equality Loudoun » Commonwealth Coalition responds to NJ ruling

  2. Jonathan says:

    Look what the “some families” crew is saying in Colorado. Interestingly, Bob Marshall picked up on this point at last night’s debate:

    New Jersey has no law banning marriages that would be illegal in another state (Massachusetts has such a provision). Thus, homosexuals from any state, including the 20 states with marriage protection amendments, may be able to travel to New Jersey, get married, and then return home demanding recognition of their New Jersey Marriage in their home state.

    It’s amazing how disciplined and coordinated the AGI is. They operate like an army.

  3. David says:

    They are an army, aren’t they? They claim to be engaged in a “war” on our families and our right to exist openly and honestly.

    It must be nice to be able to make arguments “unburdened by facts,” as our friend Bill puts it. There is not, and never will be with this legislature, a judge in Virginia who would consider overturning 30 years worth of Virginia marriage law to entertain such a challenge. This is the reddest of red herrings, and both Bobs (McDonnell and Marshall) are shamefully aware of it.

    We will repeat as often as neccessary the pertinent fact: Virginia is the only state in which judges must be both nominated and appointed by the legislature. We are still awaiting the name of a single “activist judge” in Virginia.