Oct 27, 2006  |  By: RYAN LEE  | COMMENTS     

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Oct. 25 that the state legislature has 180 days to amend the Garden State’s laws to provide equal benefits to gay couples.

“The legislature must either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure, which will provide for, on equal terms, the rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples,” Justice Barry Albin wrote for the 4-3 majority.

All seven justices agreed that the state constitution requires that gay couples receive equal legal recognition, but they differed on whether that recognition must come in the form of marriage.

“Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this state, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our state constitution,” Albin wrote.

The three dissenters, led by Chief Justice Deborah Poritz, argued that only the term “marriage” would ensure equal rights.

“We must not underestimate the power of language,” Poritz wrote. “Labels set people apart as surely as physical separation on a bus or in school facilities. Labels are used to perpetuate prejudice about differences that, in this case, are embedded in law.”

Leaders at Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund, which brought the New Jersey lawsuit on behalf of seven gay and lesbian couples, were cautiously excited about the ruling.

“Of course, that means in the next 180 days there’s some extra work to be done,” said Hayley Gorenberg, deputy legal director for Lambda. “But this is certainly a really big win.

“It’s really important to note that the court was unanimous in ruling for equality,” Gorenberg said. “There is no division among the judges that there has to be equality for all couples in New Jersey.”

Concerned Women for America was among the first conservative groups to pounce on the ruling, accusing the New Jersey court of potentially “uprooting” marriage across the country.

“This is a textbook example of agenda-driven judges who are willing to twist their state laws and invade the province of the legislative branch in order to force same-sex ‘marriage’ on the people of New Jersey,” CWA Chief Counsel Jan LaRue said in a prepared statement. “Because New Jersey has no residency requirement for marriage, if the legislature caves in to the court, it could open the door for lawsuits challenging every state’s marriage law.”

As many legal experts predicted, the New Jersey high court timed its decision with the retirement of Poritz, who some called the high court’s “guiding force” to end discrimination. She turned 70 on Oct. 26, reaching the mandatory retirement age.

“She really has been the guiding force for 10 years when it comes to dealing with discrimination issues,” said Frank Askin, the Robert E. Knowlton scholar at the Rutgers School of Law in Newark, N.J. “Everyone anticipated … that this is her swan song.”

The New Jersey decision echoes rulings issued by high courts in two other states, Vermont and Massachusetts, but those two states settled upon different policies to fulfill the court orders.

The Vermont legislature created the nation’s first civil unions in 2000, after being ordered by the state Supreme Court to bring gay and lesbian couples on par with married heterosexuals. Same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in 2004, after the state legislature failed to respond to the court’s 180-day deadline to revise the marriage code.

Connecticut legalized civil unions last year, the first state to enact such legislation without a court order.

The campaign to enact full marriage equality in New Jersey went into high gear immediately after the ruling, with Garden State Equality announcing that three state legislators were ready to introduce a pro-gay marriage bill. The statewide gay rights group also launched a television ad advocating same-sex marriage hours after the ruling.

“Thousands of us will now hit the streets, the phones and the hallways to get this legislation passed,” said Garden State Equality Chair Steven Goldstein, who was far from celebratory after the ruling.

“Those who would view today’s Supreme Court ruling as a victory for same-sex couples are dead wrong,” Goldstein said in a prepared statement. “So help us God, New Jersey’s LGBTI community and our millions of straight allies will settle for nothing less than 100 percent marriage equality.”

Lambda’s Gorenberg agreed that convincing the state legislature to adopt civil unions, or anything other than marriage, is not sufficient.

“I have to say, I wouldn’t consider it to be a full win [if anything other than marriage is approved],” Gorenberg said.

While decrying the ruling, some conservative groups also dismissed the notion that it was a ...