New Jersey's Supreme Court passed the buck onto the State Legislature on the “gay-marriage” issue. While doing this they have made some strong statements and directives to the legislature about same-sex unions. The Supreme Court has decided that same-sex couples should be given all of the rights as those in a heterosexual marriage. It has given the lawmakers six months time to alter the current law on this subject.The directive from the Supreme Court to the Legislature is to alter the marriage law to include same-sex couples or create a premise like a civil union that provides all the rights and benefits that a marriage grants. This includes a lot of those privileges that are taken for granted in a marriage and which are not available for these couples now. These include receiving benefits from the state when a partner dies, tax deductions for medical expenses of the spouse and no fees when partners transfer real estate between themselves. The rights that are being fought include parental rights, which are given in a marriage to a spouse even if there are not biological parents. These will cause all the laws regarding children to come into play, in a same-sex union, like child support, custody issues and support after separation. Court's decision seems to be in the direction of a giant step toward “equality”.
The current law that is in place for same-sex couples has limited benefits like hospital visitation, a few tax benefits and guardianship only in the case a partner is disabled. It does not provide health benefits from an employer and also the right to change surnames. If one partner wants to change the surname it has to be done through the court. Moreover gaining legal recognition is a big issue for same-sex couples unlike heterosexual couples who could marry to gain it. On a nationwide basis only Massachusetts has legalized gay marriage. Vermont, Connecticut and California have provided same rights as marriage if not the title of marriage. The federal government of USA does not acknowledge same-sex marriages or unions and hence these couples are not entitled to any federal benefits like those in a heterosexual marriage. In nineteen states of the US same-sex marriage is banned. These are the statistics on the gay marriage/union issue in the US. So in the wake of New Jersey's Supreme Court's decision gay and lesbian right activists and lawyers would fight for the tile “marriage”, some others for equal rights and others for a complete ban on same-sex marriages/unions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
President Bush Thursday reiterated his belief that "marriage is a union between a man and a woman" a day after the New Jersey Supreme Court [official website] ruled that same-sex couples in the state must be afforded the same rights [JURIST report] as heterosexual couples. At a Republican fundraiser Bush spoke out against what he called [transcript] the ruling of "another activist court" and stated that marriage is "a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended." Bush has pushed [JURIST report] for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages but the Marriage Protection Amendment [PDF text; H.J. Res. 88 summary] was defeated [JURIST report] in the US House of Representatives in July.
While the New Jersey ruling extends same-sex couples the same rights as married couples, the court left it up to the state's legislature to decide whether New Jersey will recognize same-sex marriage or another form of civil unions. New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Barry Albin [official profile] held:
Denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. The Court holds that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph I 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 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.
Reaction in New Jersey was swift, as Republican legislators promised to introduce a bill [Reuters report] next week calling for an amendment to the New Jersey State Constitution [text] that will define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Legislators for both parties will affirm the equal rights of same-sex couples but will unlikely allow the unions to be called a marriage. The American Civil Liberties Union [advocacy website] applauded the New Jersey decision and stated that public support for marriage for same-sex couples in New Jersey is strong and growing [press release].
Currently, Massachusetts is the only state to allow same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive], which was legalized when the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts [official] ruled [JURIST report] in 2003 that a ban on such marriages was unconstitutional. Several cases similar to the New Jersey case have been decided or are pending in other states including California, Washington, Tennessee, Nebraska, and Connecticut [JURIST reports]. AP has more.
DALLAS, Oct 26 (Reuters) - U.S. religious conservatives may be energized by a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling granting rights to gay couples and it could tilt the balance for Republicans in some close races in the Nov. 7 elections, analysts and activists said on Thursday.
"Hot button social issues have come alive again. ... The Iraq issue had taken away from the social issues that religious conservatives wanted to focus on," said Scott Keeter, director of survey research at the Pew Research Center.
"This decision at least gives them a news hook to restart that discussion," he told Reuters.
President George W. Bush, who draws much support from religious conservatives and is campaigning to stop Democrats taking over Congress, seized on Wednesday's court ruling that gave gay couples the same rights as married heterosexuals.
"Yesterday in New Jersey, we had another activist court issue a ruling that raises doubts about the institution of marriage. I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman," he said at an appearance in Des Moines, Iowa.
"We believe in family values, we believe values are important and we believe marriage is a fundamental institution of civilization," he said, echoing a theme that served Republicans well in the 2004 elections.
Races where the decision could have an impact include the Senate race in Virginia, where Republican Sen. George Allen has seen a big lead over Democrat Jim Webb evaporate. Virginia is one of eight states where voters will be asked to decide on constitutional amendments limiting gay marriage or unions.
"In a close election almost anything can make a difference and Virginia is one state where this could happen. ... If it helps to mobilize Christian conservatives it could potentially give George Allen a bit of an uptick," said Keeter.
PRESSING CONSERVATIVE BUTTONS
Wednesday's decision, which left it to New Jersey lawmakers to decide if gay unions can be called marriage, was not seen as pressing conservative buttons as hard as a 2003 Massachusetts court ruling that it was unconstitutional to ban gay marriage.
In the 2004 election, many states had ballot initiatives limiting gay marriage -- a factor credited with boosting support for Bush.
But there is no doubt that buttons have been pressed.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, an influential conservative lobby group, said the decision should "should give momentum to the eight states with marriage protection amendments on the November ballot."
He also said that the New Jersey court had made "the legislature their henchmen ... as the legislature has the non-choice of creating same-sex marriage or marriage of same-sex persons called civil unions."
Other powerful conservative groups such as Focus on the Family were also galvanized by the decision, which they see as a threat to the traditional family and by extension their vision of a functioning society.
"This ruling once again highlights the need for voters to enact state marriage-protection amendments to keep marriage out of the hands of activist courts," said Focus on the Family chairman James Dobson, who has been using his nationally syndicated radio show to urge conservatives to vote.
Gay activists who resent discrimination based on their sexual orientation said they did not see their own base rallying because of the decision.
"I don't see our side using this decision to help defeat the constitutional amendments. I don't see how we can use this decision," Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce, told Reuters.
Some conservatives say they are unconcerned about the prospect of gay marriage. Many Americans are economic conservatives but tend to be more socially liberal.
New Jersey's ruling granting same-sex couples the same legal rights of marriage as heterosexuals is a wake-up call to the need for a Marriage Protection Amendment, many evangelicals said Wednesday.
Related
N.J. Court Opens Door to Gay 'Marriage'
(October 25, 2006)
The state's high court ruling yesterday just fell short of legalizing gay marriage but opened the door to its approval. Evangelical leaders condemned the ruling stating that it rips up the meaning of marriage and prompts swift action for its protection across the states.
"The New Jersey Supreme Court has blatantly and arrogantly ordered the state Legislature to rip up what marriage has meant for thousands of years," said Dr. James Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family, in a released statement Wednesday. "The justices have made clear their disdain and disrespect for the true decision makers in our democracy — the people — as well as for the institution of marriage."
By the 4-3 Supreme Court decision, New Jersey joins Vermont and Connecticut as the only states allowing civil unions. Massachusetts remains the only state to allow gay marriage. Reports indicate that if the New Jersey court had legalized gay marriage outright, the largely Democratic state could have drawn more gay couples than Massachusetts. Massachusetts bans out-of-state gay couples from marrying if their marriages would not be recognized in their home states - a law New Jersey does not have.
“If marriage can mean anything, then marriage means nothing,” said Alliance Defense Fund Senior Counsel Glen Lavy. “This is a wake-up call for people who believe that marriage doesn’t need constitutional protection. The court was right to conclude there is no fundamental right to same-sex ‘marriage,’ but to characterize marriage as just another option along with other ‘unions’ makes marriage meaningless.
It’s critical that people vote for marriage amendments like those in Arizona, Virginia, and Wisconsin, which prevent a court from giving same-sex couples marriage in everything but name only.”
Eight states – Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin – have gay marriage bans on the Nov. 7 ballots. The amendments would limit marriage to unions of one man and one woman and some would foreclose the possibility of civil unions.
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) also stressed that the decision on marriage should be made by the people.
"The decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court only deepens the constitutional crisis with respect to the protection of traditional marriage, and warrants swift, decisive action by Congress in the form of passage of the Marriage Protection Amendment," Brownback said in a released statement. "Huge social changes should be decided by the people and their elected representatives and should not be forced by the courts.”
Gay “marriage” supporters still continue to push for full gay marriage. They have already lost in several state courts including New York, Washington, Nebraska and Georgia. And same-sex unions were also banned in 15 states. Pending cases, similar to that of New Jersey's, are currently in California, Connecticut, Iowa and Maryland.
While gay marriage supporters have had a losing streak, Dobson warned that states could only be a step away from the legalization of same-sex marriage.
"We only hope the residents of the eight states who will vote on such amendments on Nov. 7 recognize that their state may be only one court ruling away from being forced to accept gay marriage — just as we've seen in Massachusetts and New Jersey," said Dobson. "Nothing less than the future of the American family hangs in the balance if we allow one-man, one-woman marriage to be redefined out of existence.
"And, make no mistake; that is precisely the outcome the New Jersey Supreme Court is aiming for with this decision."
Post a Comment