ACLU Cheers Unanimous New Jersey High Court Decision On Gay Unions

Posted on October 26, 2006

Yesterday I reported on the judicial activism of the New Jersey Court in mandating gay marriage in all but name. I stated that the decision was a mixed bag but it opened many doors we should be aware of. I also stated that while the ACLU were involved in the lawsuit I wasn’t sure exactly what their reaction would be. I am wondering no more. The ACLU are cheering!

The American Civil Liberties Union today cheered a unanimous decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court holding that it is unconstitutional for the state to bar same-sex couples from the hundreds of family protections the state provides through marriage. The court referred the matter to the state legislature, which has 180 days to either amend existing marriage laws or create some other system to give same-sex couples the same marriage protections under the law.

“Today’s court decision is a giant step toward ending the unfairness that same-sex couples face in marriage,” said Matt Coles, Director of the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project. “Same-sex couples fall in love, make commitments and build families just like opposite-sex couples. And as the court ruled today, same-sex couples shouldn’t be denied the important family protections that come with marriage. We now call on the New Jersey legislature to make sure that same-sex couples are not denied the dignity that comes only through marriage.”

Public support for marriage for same-sex couples in New Jersey is strong and growing. New Jersey favors marriage for lesbian and gay couples 56 to 39 percent, according to a Garden State Equality-Zogby poll of New Jersey voters surveyed earlier this year.

If public support is so strong in New Jersey then why cheer a court mandating this on the people? If the ACLU are confident of the public support then why use judicial fiat to impose it on people? Why not take the issue to the people properly and let them voice their support in a poll that counts with a vote? Why not use a democratic method proving the public support and diminishing potential backlash? If you are so sure of the numbers put your money where your mouth is and advance your cause in a fair and democratic way instead of cheering the decision of an elite few in black robes forcing it on the people.

The ACLU believes that the only way to guarantee full equal treatment for same-sex couples is for the state legislature to enact a law granting lesbian and gay couples the ability to marry.

But wait, is that what happened? Or wasn’t it the court commanding the state legislature to enact a law granting them the ability to marriage benefits?

As New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Deborah Poritz noted in her dissent, which was joined by two other justices: “We must not underestimate the power of language. Labels set people apart as surely as physical separation on a bus or in school facilities. Labels are used to perpetuate prejudice about differences that, in this case, are embedded in the law. By excluding same-sex couples from civil marriage, the State declares that it is legitimate to differentiate between their commitments and the commitments of heterosexual couples. Ultimately, the message is that what same-sex couples have is not as important or as significant as ‘real’ marriage, that such lesser relationships cannot have the same meaning of marriage.”

Yes, language is very powerful. I guess that is why the court decided to be nice and allow the state legislature to choose a name to call the policy they decided to force on the people. After all, I guess you are not technically redifining marriage as long as you call it something else. Of course it isn’t surprising for the ACLU to cheer such judicial tyranny; afterall, it was in favor of their agenda.

As John Hawkins says:

If you want to know why it makes sense to push for Constitutional Amendments designed to block gay marriage on the state and federal level, this case is a perfect example. When you have judges acting in this fashion, like a super legislature that can make any law they wish without regard to what the people or their elected representatives want, you can try to appeal their rulings or stop them by electing conservatives who’ll promise to put originalist judges on the bench. However, in cases like this, constitutional amendments are the only effective way to prevent these power mad judges from running roughshod over the wants and desires of the American people.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

» Filed Under ACLU, Activist Judges, Homosexual Agenda, News

Trackback URL

Comments

2 Responses to “ACLU Cheers Unanimous New Jersey High Court Decision On Gay Unions”

Paul Yanna on October 27th, 2006 10:03 am

“Yes, language is very powerful.”

Especially when you learn how to use it.
kerwin_brown on October 28th, 2006 9:30 pm

I know that a court ordering the state legislature to do anything sounds like a violation of both the separation of powers and the guarantee of a republic form of government.

The legislation has a number of options depending on why the court made the decision.

I have heard that a non discrimination law based on sexual orientation was involved. If that is so then the law can be changed. Another option is to pass legislation like Colorado Senate Bill 166 which Dr. James Dobson supported. The legislature could always choose to defy the court and remove funding from the court system.