Fingers Crossed!

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:09am

MOUNT LAUREL (AP) -- Gay couples will learn today whether they will have the right to marry in New Jersey. Winnie Comfort, a spokeswoman for the state judiciary, said the New Jersey Supreme Court will release its highly anticipated decision in a case brought by seven gay couples who claim the state constitution entitles them to marry.

New Jersey is one of only five states without either a law or a state constitutional amendment blocking same-sex marriage. As a result, advocates on both sides believe New Jersey is more likely than other states to allow gays to wed.

Currently, only Massachusetts allows same-sex marriages.

Advocates from across the country for and against same-sex marriage are watching the New Jersey case closely. Many of those observers expect gay marriage will be allowed in the state.

"New Jersey is a stepping stone,’’ said Matt Daniels, president of the Virginia-based Alliance for Marriage, a group pushing for an amendment to the federal Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage. "It’s not about New Jersey.’’

Gay marriage supporters have had a two-year losing streak, striking out in state courts in New York and Washington state and in ballot boxes in 15 states where constitutions have been amended since 2004 to ban same-sex unions.

Only Massachusetts -- by virtue of a 2003 ruling from that state’s top court -- allows the marriages.

The national legal impact of the decision there, though, has been slight, perhaps because Massachusetts has a law barring out-of-state couples from wedding there if their marriages would not be recognized in their home states.

New Jersey has no such law.

People on both sides of the issue expect a victory for same-sex unions would make New Jersey a hot spot for gay couples from around the country who want to get married. Some of those couples could return home and sue to have their marriages recognized elsewhere.

Daniels said that next generation of lawsuits is a strategy for gay-rights advocates. "Their game, of course, is they figure all they need to do is execute this maneuver in a half-dozen states and they’ll have the momentum,’’ he said.

David S. Buckel, the Lambda Legal lawyer who argued on behalf of the seven New Jersey couples, said he does expect some couples to come to the New Jersey to get married if his suit is successful. But, he said, "it won’t be tidal.’’

Buckel said that there have been relatively few such lawsuits filed in the U.S. by couples who went to Canada to exchange vows.

And, he said, while many same-sex couples would prefer to be married, they are getting more legal protections for their relationships. Several states, including New Jersey, offer domestic partnerships or civil unions with some of the benefits of marriage. A growing number of employers are treating same-sex couples the same way they treat married couples.

Cases similar to New Jersey’s are pending in California, Connecticut, Iowa and Maryland.

Conservatives watching the cases believe the best chance for gay marriage to be allowed would be in New Jersey, where the state Supreme Court has a history of extending civil rights protections.

The ruling is to come on Deborah Poritz’s final day as chief justice. Under the state constitution, she must retire Thursday, the day she turns 70.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:14am

I have very mixed feelings about the timing of this, two weeks before the election.

A positive ruling will surely be used as to scapegoat gays again.

My fingers are crossed that this doesn't backfire.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:27am

good luck, jersey, make us proud!

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:29am

By Kristen A. Graham and Jennifer Moroz
Inquirer Staff Writers

New Jersey could become the second state in the nation to grant gay couples the right to marry today, with the state Supreme Court ready to issue its decision in a landmark case at mid-afternoon.

Pundits are poised. On both sides, playbooks are primed, with news releases and talking points for both yes and no votes ready to go.

With Chief Justice Deborah Poritz's retirement looming - she turns 70, mandatory retirement age, tomorrow - the court's decision has been eagerly anticipated.

"I have gotten absolutely zero sleep in the last few days. I wake up in the middle of the night and rush to my computer. I wonder, 'Is there anything more we can do?' " said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, a gay-rights advocacy group.

Waiting is "torture," Goldstein said, but there's something worse.

"Every day that passes that we don't have marriage equality is a day that hurts families," said Goldstein.

The Supreme Court yesterday let the world know its decision was forthcoming in its customary fashion: by posting a notice of the next day's expected opinions on a state Web site. A spokeswoman confirmed that the opinion was to be released at 3 p.m. today.

Jersey justices heard oral arguments for the case, Lewis v. Harris, in February. Seven same-sex couples from around the state contend that their constitutional rights are violated by municipal officials' refusal to let them marry.

New Jersey is considered a prime battleground for the case. It is one of five states without a constitutional amendment or law banning same-sex marriage, and its court is considered fiercely independent.

Massachusetts is the only state in the United States that permits same-sex marriage.

Some had speculated the decision might be held up until after Nov. 7, to bolster U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez's chances of election in a hotly contested race with potential national ramifications. A ruling for gay marriage could trigger a backlash from conservative voters that might swing the race in favor of Menendez's opponent, Republican Thomas H. Kean Jr., according to some pundits.

Both Menendez and Kean have the same position on same-sex unions - they are against gay marriage but favor domestic partnerships already permitted by the state - but the fear of some Democrats is that Republicans angered by the decision would take out their frustration against a candidate they perceived as "liberal."

Now that a pre-Election Day decision is forthcoming, there's yet more guessing going on: Does the opinion's release date mean bad news for the gay community? Is it Poritz's last stab to shape her legacy?

Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said the timing has been a major talking point in political circles. "It could be a plus or minus for Bob Menendez... . I think Menendez will have a problem if it comes down before the election and they legalize some sort of gay marriage... . Is it a big enough problem to cost him his seat? I don't know. But it would be a problem."

The antigay marriage lobby also is poised with its strategy.

"We are prepared to do whatever it takes to protect marriage," said Len Deo, president of the New Jersey Family Policy Council. "We will move for a state constitutional amendment to define marriage."

Anthony Coley, a spokesman for Gov. Corzine, has said that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage, the governor would not "sign legislation to take away people's rights."

William Eskridge Jr., a professor of law at Yale University who is a national expert on the same-sex marriage issue and coauthor of Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse?, said he didn't think the court would completely let the gay community down.

"It might not be marriage," he said. "The obvious option would be what Vermont did in 1999," which was to rule that it was unfair to deny certain equal protections and punt the issue back to the state legislature for a new law.

Vermont's legislature ultimately granted same-sex couples the right to enter into civil unions - a nearly identical institution to marriage, but not recognized outside the state.

"There's an obvious middle way," Eskridge said.

If the court were to completely reject same-sex claims, he said, it wouldn't be much of a legacy for Poritz as she walks out the door.

"If they want to issue it on her watch, she is very probably in favor in some way," Eskridge said. "It's sort of ho-hum to be the 20th court to deny these claims... . Does the chief justice want to hurry up and get her name attached to the 20th one denying rights?"

Still, even civil unions, he said, "would be a great step forward in New Jersey."

Either way it goes, today's decision will put a stop to the seemingly endless wondering by parties with a stake in the decision.

Winnie Comfort, a spokeswoman for the state judiciary, has been rather enjoying these last few months. She's been getting to know a lot of reporters much better, for one thing.

"We get calls frequently. A while ago, there were reporters checking in once a week or once a month. Now, it's not uncommon for reporters to check in once a day," she said.

She understood why - no news outlet wants to miss one of the biggest stories of the year.

During the summer, Comfort said, "I learned about more reporters' vacation plans than I ever could have imagined. I could have written a travelogue for the media. I heard when people were going to be away. I heard where they were going. I heard when they were going to be back."

Goldstein, of the gay-rights group, has been feeling the sense of urgency.

"It is impossible to compartmentalize the wait for this decision out of your mind," Goldstein said. "This is a monumental decision."

The New Jersey Supreme Court is expected to release its ruling at 3 p.m. Go to philly.com for instant coverage, including reaction and a text of the ruling.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:49am

Flying back to Tennessee tomorrow to vote against an anti-same sex union proposition. I was waiting to officially move my voting status until this vote.

I can't wait to hear what Jersey does.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:50am

wait. they're gonna let girls marry each other too? i didn't sign-up for that.

Updated On: 10/25/06 at 08:50 AM

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:52am

RobbO, people like YOU are the reason we no longer have a community! :P

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:54am

SOMMS, I wouldn't think you would want this to pass - divorce is so much messier than what you're used to!

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:54am

RobbO is a racist pig !

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:57am

See, Robb, I am not the one who starts with the name-calling. Please take note.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 8:59am

jerseygirl, are you the lesbian that bumps into me at any gay event, dance, etc. that i go to and won't even let me within 50 feet of a pool table?

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:01am

Pool tables are for lezzies.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:01am

Oh, I would NEVER marry anyone Rath, but we deserve the right to that option.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:03am

i might get married but just for the wedding cash.

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:03am

and this is why SOMMS and me are poddies.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:03am

Good to know, SOMMS. Although you did propose to me once, so bite me.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:06am

although listening to that awful jim gearheart on nj101.5 this morning, he warned me that such an act would set everything back and said it wouldn't really be legal because a marriage has to have a man and a woman. plus, he added which one would be the mister and which would be the mrs.

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:08am

perhaps we should call him Jim NOheart

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:08am

I'll be the mister.

Duh.

[RobbO]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:10am

i thought the media was supposed to be liberal but that station (and it's talkshow hosts) are very, very conservative. and homophobic.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:10am

I only asked you to marry me to get to your cousin. I had a Bishop with annulment papers and a flight booked to the Vatican.

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:10am

Even when Rath is in a hetero relationship she's the mister.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:12am

You're dead to me, SOMMS.

And Boobs, of course - look at the men with whom I surrounded.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:13am

Well, you ain't in the will anyway Rath.

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 9:13am

True dat rath...some even like to wear dresses.