Back

ABA Journal

Home

Family Law

New Jersey trial judge orders state to recognize same-sex marriage

Sep 27, 2013, 04:30 pm CDT

Comments

So, apparently New Jersey has a statute affirmatively recognizing civil unions, but these yahoos are attacking it because it can’t supplythe federal tax effects they want.  Basically, they are openly asking the court to legislate, and they have found a judge willing to do exactly that (shocker).

By B. McLeod on 2013 09 27, 5:54 pm CDT

We need an across-the-board decision by the Federal Government.  Here in TN, they’ve gone as far as to create a new holiday- “Traditional Marriage Day” in which the wording of the bill quotes The Holy Bible.  Why does the State feel it has the right to continually define marriage?  Exactly what is “Traditional” Marriage in Tennessee seeing as even Interracial Marriage is STILL outlawed by the State Constitution along with Same Sex Marriage?  http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2013/08/on-wrong-side-of-hypocrisy-traditional.html

By Brandt Hardin on 2013 09 27, 7:48 pm CDT

Simple solution. States stop marrying anyone. States license civil unions. Churches marry people and let each church set what rules they want. Governments set what ever benefits and requirements they want for civil unions and leave marriage alone. Both sides will hate this.

By Fred on 2013 09 28, 2:08 pm CDT

Mr. McLeod:  There is a prior NJ Supreme Court ruling that under our State Constitution domestic partnerships must be treated the same as marriages.  As DOMA has been held unconstitutional with respect to same sex marriages, domestic partnerships are no longer treated the same as the Federal Government must recognize same sex marriages but not domestic partnerships.  As you live in a community property state, you must realize that marriage besides involving the relationship of two people, involves property rights, and governmental benefits and responsibilities.  Judge Jacobson as a trial court judge is not legislating from the bench.  She is following our state’s precedent.

By George Sly on 2013 09 29, 3:14 pm CDT

In most of our history, state law creates relationships, while federal tax law assigns the federal tax consequences.  This case, as you have described it, appears to be backward reasoning.

I expect there will be more of the same, as the federal 401(a) rules, impacted by Windsor, progressively enforce same sex marriage on the states via federal mandate.

By B. McLeod on 2013 09 30, 1:19 am CDT

Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, is opposed to same-sex marriage,

Really, so I guess he sees same sex marriage as a sin but he appears to have no problem with gluttony. That’s an interesting take on how to be the first to throw stones.

Personally I think there should be a law against a man in his position wearing too much gold jewelry around his neck with low open neck line shirts. There should also be a law requiring all Governors to have necks.

But you know we simply can’t have everything we want now can we?

When are we going to get used to the idea that 9 million in the LGBT community means they have political power and a voice and they want their civil rights, so lets just stand out of their way and allow them to live their American dream.

By concernedcitizen on 2013 09 30, 4:01 am CDT

Well, of course we should run the entire country for 2.8% of the population and reorder all of our laws and institutions to that end.  Because it is the Hollywood fad du jour, and the House of Delegates says so.

By B. McLeod on 2013 09 30, 7:26 am CDT

Funny, I didn’t see anything in the constitution about groups of 2.8% or less of the population not being entitled to equal protection of the law.

By NoleLaw on 2013 09 30, 8:20 am CDT

@7:  “McLead”

Please do enlighten us as to the percentage threshold any one minority group must meet in order to be entitled to equal protection of the law.  3%?  5%?  Perhaps 10%

By EsqinAustin on 2013 09 30, 12:42 pm CDT

@ 7: Yeah, it’s a shame Mel Gibson harshed the run of that whole Hollywood “Braveheart” buzz before they could get any choice legislation passed, by hating on gays and Jews.

By BMF on 2013 09 30, 1:36 pm CDT

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.