How Proposition 8 Decision in California Might Affect New Jersey

On Wednesday, a federal judge overturned California’s same-sex marriage ban in what is a landmark decision that could very likely find itself before the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether gays have a constitutional right to marry in America. Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker made the ruling in the case that was filed by two gay couples, who claimed that Proposition 8 violated their civil rights.

Supporters of Proposition 8 argued that the ban was essential to preserve the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible parenting. Proposition 8 was passed by California voters in November 2008; a mere five months after the state Supreme Court legalized gay marriage.

In the judge’s 136-page ruling he laid out the unconstitutionally of the ban. This ruling included:

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples."

Regardless of the outcome, both sides of the argument intended to appeal the decision. The case would move to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals before it would possibly head to the U.S. Supreme Court; based on it accepting to hear the case.

This verdict comes on the heels of a second federal gay marriage case. Last month, a federal judge in Massachusetts decided that the state’s legally married gay couples had been wrongly denied the federal financial benefits of marriage due to a law that prevents the U.S. government from recognizing same sex unions.

Academic experts presented and testified on topics ranging from religious views on homosexuality to the historical meaning of marriage to the political influence of the gay rights movement to the fitness of gay parenting.

The side in favor of maintaining the ban argued that gay marriage was an experiment with unknown social consequences that should be left up to the voters to accept or reject.

However, this debate might be going on in California on the other side of the country; it might have some implications for New Jersey in the future. Late last year and early this year, the gay marriage debate picked up steam in Trenton.

On January 7, 2010, following roughly 90 minutes of emotional debate; the state Senate voted down a bill to legalize same sex marriage in the state of New Jersey. The final result yielded 20 senators opposing the measure, 14 supporting it, and 3 abstentions. The timing of it also came when the state was in transition with Democratic Governor Jon Corzine on his way out and Republican Governor-elect Chris Christie on his way in. Christie let his opinion be known during the debate and might have drew some undecided senators to his side.

One writer for the Star Ledger, Tom Moran, came out the next day with a tough criticism for the Democrats in Trenton and their weak fight for gay marriage. Moran attacks the lackluster arguments by Democrats and the inability to keep the majority support they seemed to have at one point to pass the Marriage Equality Act. For Moran, it was just another mistake made by the Democrats over the last decade. Another article was written the day after elaborating more on the result and what led to it and why some may have voted the way they did.

All was somewhat quiet for much of the next two months. Then in March, gay rights supporters voiced their continued opposition to the result in January and prepared a legal action to move forward legalizing same sex marriage.

Lambda Legal was chosen to announce the details of the supporters. Lambda Legal represented seven gay couples in a 2006 case, Lewis v. Harris, which the New Jersey Supreme Court came one vote short of requiring the state to recognize gay marriage. The case was an argument over if gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights as married heterosexuals. Following this, New Jersey created civil unions.

Those incidents led up to the recent proceedings in New Jersey about three weeks ago. Supporters and opponents of same sex marriage gathered in Trenton in counter rallies. The groups were there in the wake of the state Supreme Court bringing up those six cases again. They are continuing their fight because the court mandate from four years ago has not panned out the way it was supposed to be. Civil unions are not being recognized the same way that a marriage would be.

An argument that has been made against same sex marriage is the fate of the children in the relationship. What has been the problem is not that the two men or two women are together in a civil union, but the fact that they are not married is what makes it hard for children.

One example is:

“Kids in elementary school, in middle school and high school make fun of kids who are different, and that’s just the way it is,” said Miriam Sharpfried, a 19-year-old college student who said she was hurt when, as an eight-year-old, she found out her two mothers were not allowed to be married. “And how can you expect an eight-year-old to explain what a civil union is when most people in this room, adults, can’t explain what a civil union is.”

The state Supreme Court decided against hearing the case. Supporters, however, seemed undeterred. Steven Goldstein, chairman of Garden State Equality, the state’s largest gay rights organization, said, “We…will never give up – not until our dying breath.”

He went on to say,

"Same-sex couples will continue to be denied the consistent right to visit one another in the hospital, to make medial decisions for one another, and to receive equal health benefits from employers, all because of the deprivation of the equality and dignity that uniquely comes with the word marriage.”

Despite the fact that the court ruled against considering the case now; the possibility has been left open that it may bring it up. Essentially, for that to happen the case must move its way back through the system as it has done over the last several years.

The court’s decision adds to the blows against the gay marriage movement in New Jersey, which included Chris Christie’s election and the defeat of the bill that would have legalized gay marriage.

John Tomicki, president of the Coalition to Preserve and Protect Marriage, voiced opinion that echoes many against legalizing gay marriage. He wants voters to decide if marriage should be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Tomicki said, "I have no doubt the plaintiffs and Garden State Equality will continue their march on the courts because they do not have natural law and the public’s interests on their side."

This has been an ongoing fight in New Jersey over the last several years that has reached a bit of boiling point over the last eight months. Both sides of the argument seem to be poised to fight their stances. However, the eyes of New Jersey should be on California after Wednesday's verdict. There is a strong possibility that over the next two years the case in California will find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is uncertain how they might rule, but if they were to rule in favor of same sex couples; then it would benefit New Jersey's gay rights fight greatly.

Currently, same-sex couples can only legally wed in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Washington, D.C.