A week after the landmark U. S. Supreme Court ruling striking down a key section of the federal ban on same-sex marriage, attorneys in New Jersey asked the court to find New Jersey’s civil-union law unconstitutional. Lambda Legal filed a summary judgment motion July 3 asking Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson to avoid a trial and rule that the state’s civil-union law does not go far enough to protect same-sex couples and to instate marriage equality. Oral arguments in the case are set for Aug. 15. The motion was filed on behalf of Garden State Equality and six same-sex couples, whose suit against the state was initially filed in 2011. In the new filing, Lambda contends that, because the nation’s top court found that denying federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples is unconstitutional, and the current civil-union law prevents same-sex couples from accessing federal recognition afforded to others, it is a violation of the 2006 New Jersey Supreme Court decision mandating that sam-sex couples be “afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits enjoyed by married same-sex couples.” Lambda Legal deputy legal director Hayley Gorenberg said it is evident that the civil-union law doesn’t meet that order. “Since 2007, we have been speaking to people about how the civil unions were going for them. By 2010 it was clear that civil unions were not providing equality in their day-to-day lives,” Gorenberg said. Gorenberg said that the group of same-sex couples is a mix of original plaintiffs in the 2002 case, which paved the way for the civil-union law, and new couples and their children. “The children are plaintiffs in this case because they suffer from the results of their families not being treated equally,” she said. Gorenberg said immediately after the SCOTUS rulings, the plaintiffs, Lambda Legal and Garden State Equality discussed the impact the rulings could have on their case. “We conferenced before the judge and said the ruling from SCOTUS gives us the material we need to say that this case is over on the law, aside from the fact that one doesn’t need a trial to see that civil unions and barring people from marriage does not provide equality,” she said. “When we started the case, the federal benefits were off limits due to DOMA. With DOMA repealed, people in New Jersey are still denied the full range of federal benefits, so based on that complaint, and that we won the ruling in 2006 that the state constitution requires equality, we do not need a trial on this matter.” N.J. Gov. Chris Christie opposes marriage equality and last year vetoed a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in the state. Christie instead advocated for a public referendum on the issue. Lawmakers are planning a veto-override vote, and there is also legislation pending that would put the issue to the public. Gorenberg, however, said the state should not have to wait for either a bill or a ballot for the freedom to marry. “There are different roads to equality and whatever would stop the harm to New Jersey same-sex couples and their children fastest is the best because each day that goes by, people are denied their rights,” she said. “That said, we have a really ambitious argument schedule, and we are going into oral arguments Aug. 15 and there is a good chance that our case will provide the quickest avenue on action.”
Newsletter Sign-up