Gay Marriage Ruling In New Jersey Happen So Fast It Turned The Governor on It’s Head

New Jersey’s highest court unanimously ruled Friday that same-sex marriage may commence in that state on Monday. In doing so, the court refused Governor Chris Christie’s request for a stay that would put on hold, pending appeal, an order issued by a lower court on September 27th that had declared the state’s marriage laws unconstitutional. New Jersey thus becomes the first state to usher in gay marriage since the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, which barred federal recognition of state-sanctioned marriages, in United States v. Windsor. What’s more, the New Jersey judges relied on theDOMA ruling. Windsor now seems to have consequences not directly intended by the Supreme Court but clearly anticipated. This is what supporters of same-sex marriage hoped Windsor might achieve.

Evan Wolfson, the president of the group Freedom to Marry and one of the pioneering advocates for marriage equality, told me in an e-mail shortly after the ruling, “The work is not done but the handwriting is on the wall—and it says, ‘Freedom to Marry in New Jersey.’” He added, referring to ongoing efforts by advocates in New Jersey to get the votes in the state legislature to override Christie’s veto of a marriage-equality bill that passed earlier, “While couples begin marrying next week, the legislature should act now to get on the right side of history by finishing what they started when they passed the freedom to marry bill last year.”

The ruling Friday, in a case brought by the gay-rights group Lambda Legal on behalf of six couples, had the effect of making New Jersey the fourteenth state to allow same-sex marriage, and the third-largest by population, after California and New York. It is highly unusual for an appellate court not to stay a lower court order of this nature while it is being reviewed. It is thus a broad and clear indication that the judges viewed the lower court’s ruling as legally proper and Christie’s position as entirely untenable. While it is technically conceivable that the New Jersey Supreme Court could reverse itself later when it hears the full appeal, should the state continue to pursue it, such a course is unlikely in the extreme.

“The Supreme Court has made its determination,” a spokesperson for Christie said after the ruling, adding that the Governor would abide by and implement it. That suggests that he may be ready to abandon his now seemingly futile appeal. Christie has repeatedly said that he prefers a voter referendum to decide the marriage-equality issue, rather than a state law or court ruling. But polling in New Jersey suggests that a majority of its citizens support marriage equality, which may have been a factor in the court’s decision.

The case had turned on New Jersey’s civil unions, the marriage-lite alternative offered to same-sex couples. Advocates argued that because, thanks to Windsor, full federal recognition, with all the attendant benefits, was now available to couples who were actually married, the civil-union system was a form of discrimination—separate, and not equal. Thus, even though the U.S. Supreme Court was careful not to rule on the issue of whether a state had to grant marriage rights to gays, federal recognition gave advocates a powerful example of the unfairness of doing otherwise.

Even though the gay-marriage movement has had the momentum of history behind it lately, the ruling was highly unexpected. It sends a signal that following last summer’s landmark cases, it may not be as difficult as people have usually assumed to successfully argue that state courts should rule boldly and broadly in favor of marriage rights. The New Jersey courts have struggled with this area in the past, issuing several decisions that grappled with the question of whether or not the state’s civil unions, if not offering the same rights as marriages, were constitutionally satisfactory. But this ruling was simple and clear. “We conclude the State has not made the necessary showing to prevail,” the judges wrote. “And that the public interest does not favor a stay.” A certain number of New Jerseyites will have the weekend to plan a wedding.

Posted  by Richard Socarides an attorney, political strategist, writer, and longtime gay-rights advocate. He served as a White House Special Assistant and Senior Adviser during the Clinton Administration. Follow him on Twitter @Socarides.

Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/Elena Scotti