New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Gay 'Marriage' Case
The New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments in a case involving seven homosexual couples suing for the right to marry, saying the state’s constitution allows it.
The New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments in a case involving seven homosexual couples suing for the right to marry, saying the state’s constitution allows it.
The seven-justice panel in Trenton, the state capital, was asked on Wednesday by the suing couples to overturn a lower court’s decision which ruled that it is up to the state legislature to decide whether gay “marriage” should be allowed.
"It's such a fundamental institution in our society that a change in that law belongs to the elected representatives of the people," said Assistant Attorney General Patrick DeAlmeida, according to Reuters. "There is nothing in the constitution that says four members of this court can make that change."
Get Our Latest News for FREE
If the plaintiffs are successful in the Lewis v. Harris case, New Jersey would become the second state, after Massachusetts, to allow same-sex “marriages.” Other states, such as Vermont and Connecticut allow for civil unions between same-sex couples. Such unions confer the same legal rights that heterosexual couples enjoy but without the name “marriage.”
Conservative organizations, including Christian legal groups had filed documents ahead of the case arguing that allowing same-sex marriage would be harmful to society, stating that heterosexual marriage is unique because of its necessity for procreation and the importance of having a mother and a father in childrearing. The state, however, did not use those arguments.
Chief Justice Deborah Poritz asked why same-sex “marriage” was unacceptable considering that the state legislature had passed a law that there should not be discrimination based on sexual orientation. She also questioned whether marriage had changed over time, citing changes such as the overturning of laws prohibiting interracial marriage.
"It's not as if that fundamental institution hasn't changed in rather dramatic ways," said Poritz, according to Reuters. "You can't ignore modern realities."
DeAlmeida replied that a previous case which struck down a ban on interracial marriage was permitted under the U.S. Constitution in the 14th Amendment which prohibited racial discrimination. He added that there is no state constitutional protection for same-sex couples to marry or a clause in the state constitution prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
The lawyer for the couples, David Buckel of Lambda Legal, a group that supports same-sex marriage, told the court that gay couples were discriminated against by being denied marriage and that the New Jersey constitution's guarantees for liberty and equality prohibited such discrimination, according to Reuters. He said current domestic partnership laws in New Jersey gave gay couples some protection but implied they were seen as “second-class citizens.”
Buckel was also asked about polygamy. He said that marrying multiple partners was a different case because marriage was just about a relationship between two people, not more. He added that polygamy would also introduce new issues about how divorce would take place.
A decision on the case is not expected for months.
