Court: Same-sex couples must have equal rights
State Legislature has six months to decide what to call institution
BY TOM CAIAZZA
Staff Writer

TOMCAIAZZA John Tomlicky, executive director of the League of American Families, announced the Supreme Court's decision on same-sex marriages, and called for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

TRENTON - The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled last week that the Legislature must afford same-sex couples equal rights of marriage, but stopped short of calling it such.

The majority decision, written by Justice Barry T. Albin and affirmed by Justices Jaynee LaVecchia, John Wallace and Roberto Rivera-Soto, gives the Legislature 180 days to expand the rights dictated under current Domestic Partnership laws to those expressly given to heterosexual couples.

The decision would allow for either the amendment of current marriage law to include same-sex marriages or to create a "parallel statutory structure" that would provide equal "rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples."

"We have decided that our state Constitution guarantees that every statutory right and benefit conferred to heterosexual couples through civil marriage must be made available to committed same-sex couples," Albin wrote in the decision. "Now the Legislature must determine whether to alter the long-accepted definition of marriage."

In a partially dissenting opinion, Chief Justice Deborah Poritz, in her final decision on the court, said that "labels set people apart as surely as physical separation on a bus or in school facilities," and that the term marriage should have been included in the majority decision. The partial dissent was affirmed by Justices Virginia Long and James Zazzali.

"When we say that the Legislature cannot deny the tangible benefits of marriage to same-sex couples," Poritz wrote in her dissent, "but then suggest that 'a separate statutory scheme, which uses a title other than marriage' is presumptively constitutional, we demean the plaintiffs' claim. What we 'name' things matters, language matters."

The decision was announced by John Tomlicky, executive director of the League of American Families. He said that the court affirmed the lower court's decision but modified it. Speaking on behalf of the league, Tomlicky was critical of the court's decision.

"What the court has done is again split an issue, usurped the authority of the Legislature and the Constitution," Tomlicky said, "because the statute is clear and the Constitution is clear, and this court continues to subvert that document."

Tomlicky said that his coalition will move quickly to create a constitutional amendment to "clarify" the same-sex marriage issue. He would like to see a question on the ballot next November that asks the public to decide whether marriage should continue to be defined as between a man and a woman.

The Trenton Gay and Lesbian Civic Association (TGLCA) held a rally on the steps of the Hughes Justice Complex during the hours leading up to the announcement of the decision. The mood was tense but hopeful with many in attendance expressing hope for a win for same-sex couples across the state.

Jay Lassiter, a gay rights activist, said that he was nervous but resolute, and he wished only for the same basic rights that other heterosexual couples possess. After hearing the decision, he said he was disappointed that a more clear-cut decision did not come from the court.

"Their job is to ensure that my rights are protected," Lassiter said. "I have a constitutional right to the same freedoms as my straight reverend."

Demetrios Stratis, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, said that it is a win for neither side.

"The bottom line is they can't run out and get married, which is one extreme," Stratis said. "On the other hand, it doesn't say that they have no rights, which is the other extreme. It is somewhere in the middle, and I am not surprised."

Nancy Hillman, former president of the TGLCA, said that the decision was "a huge victory" because the Legislature will be forced to define marriage.

"The fact that we will be afforded the same exact rights as heterosexual couples is a huge win," Hillman said.

The Rev. Robert Kriesat, a Lutheran clergyman and gay man, said that though he would have liked an up or down decision, he is happy the court will put the onus on the Legislature to make a decision.

Kriesat said that he will take the fight to the governing body and continue to educate the public on their cause.

"I'm not ready to jump off the ship and say all is lost," Kriesat said.