"We are pleased that the New Jersey Superior Court will allow us to show how civil unions fail to provide to same-sex couples the equality promised by both the New Jersey Constitution and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution," said Jon Davidson, legal director at Lambda Legal.

"Having both a state and federal equal protection claim will only make our case stronger. We look forward to presenting a complete record of the discrimination that New Jersey's same-sex couples and their children face because of their relegation to civil unions rather than marriage."

"Civil union consigns New Jersey's same-sex couples to second class status and it continues to harm families. New Jersey's exclusion interferes during medical crises, leads to the denial of health insurance, and contributes to discrimination even in funeral homes. These families need marriage equality and should not have to live with a law that treats them as inferior," Davidson said.

"We are gaining momentum in New Jersey and there is no turning back," said Steven Goldstein, chair and CEO of Garden State Equality, the statewide LGBT equality group and lead plaintiff in the case. "The majority of voters are in favor of marriage equality, the legislature is in favor of marriage equality -- and now we intend to show that both the state and federal constitutions bar the second class treatment New Jersey is now providing."

Last June, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit for marriage equality arguing that barring same-sex couples from marriage and relegating them to civil union violates the constitutional rights of those couples and their children. In November, the Court ruled that Lambda Legal could proceed to court on a claim that civil union violates the state Equal Protection Clause. Today's ruling will allow Lambda Legal to proceed with both a state and federal equal protection claim.

Plaintiffs

Garden State Equality, New Jersey's largest LGBT civil rights organization, with more than 89,000 members, is an organizational plaintiff in the case.

The plaintiffs include: Daniel Weiss, 47, and John Grant, 47, of Asbury Park, who have been together for four years; Marsha Shapiro, 57, and Louise Walpin, 58, of Monmouth Junction, who have been together for 22 years and raised four children; Cindy Meneghin, 54, and Maureen Kilian, 54, of Butler, who were high school sweethearts and have been together for 37 years, raising two children; Tevonda and Erica Bradshaw, both 37, of North Plainfield, who have an infant son and have been together for more than four years; Marcye and Karen Nicholson-McFadden , 48 and 45 respectively, of Aberdeen, who have been together for 21 years and have two children; Keith Heimann, 53, and Tom Davidson, 49, of Shrewsbury, who this year celebrated their 25th anniversary together , and have two daughters; Elena and Liz Quinones, 33 and 45 respectively, of Phillipsburg, who are raising four children and have been together for nine years.

Meet all the plaintiffs and their families HERE.

Background

In 2002, Lambda Legal filed a historic case, Lewis v. Harris, seeking marriage equality on behalf of seven New Jersey couples. The case reached the New Jersey Supreme Court in 2006. The high court ruled unanimously that same-sex couples must be provided all the benefits and responsibilities of marriage, although it declined to mandate that marriage was specifically required, and gave the state legislature 180 days to provide equality. The legislature hastily passed a civil union law in December 2006, and began issuing civil union licenses to lesbian and gay couples in February 2007.

In December 2008 the Civil Union Review Commission, appointed by the legislature pursuant to the Civil Union Act itself, issued its unanimous final report documenting how civil union falls short of providing the court-mandated equality for same-sex couples. In January 2010, days before the legislative session ended, the New Jersey Senate voted on and failed to pass a marriage equality law. On March 18, 2010, Lambda Legal filed a motion in aid of litigants' rights asking the New Jersey Supreme Court to intercede and order marriage to secure compliance with its original mandate of equality for the Lewis v. Harris plaintiffs, but in July 2010, the New Jersey Supreme Court denied the motion, requiring further proceedings to develop a record in Superior Court.

Source: SDGLN

Gov. Chris Christie has followed through on his promise to reject a bill allowing same-sex marriage in New Jersey by quickly vetoing the measure Friday and renewing his call for a ballot question to decide the issue.

The veto came a day after the state Assembly passed the bill. The state Senate had passed it on Monday. Christie, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage, had vowed "very swift action" once the measure reached his desk.

In returning the bill to the Legislature, Christie reaffirmed his view that voters should decide whether to change the definition of marriage in New Jersey. His veto also proposed creating an ombudsman to oversee compliance with the state's civil union law, which same-sex couples have said is flawed and promotes discrimination.

"I am adhering to what I've said since this bill was first introduced — an issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide," Christie said in a statement. "I continue to encourage the Legislature to trust the people of New Jersey and seek their input by allowing our citizens to vote on a question that represents a profoundly significant societal change. This is the only path to amend our State Constitution and the best way to resolve the issue of same-sex marriage in our state.

"I have been just as adamant that same-sex couples in a civil union deserve the very same rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples — as well as the strict enforcement of those rights and benefits," the statement continued. "Discrimination should not be tolerated and any complaint alleging a violation of a citizen's right should be investigated and, if appropriate, remedied. To that end, I include in my conditional veto the creation of a strong Ombudsman for Civil Unions to carry on New Jersey's strong tradition of tolerance and fairness."

Democrats who had pushed the bill forward said they were disappointed, but not surprised, by Christie's action.

"It's unfortunate that the governor would let his own personal ideology infringe on the rights of thousands of New Jerseyans," said Reed Gusciora, one of two openly gay New Jersey lawmakers and a sponsor of the bill. "For all those who oppose marriage equality, their lives would have been completely unchanged by this bill, but for same-sex couples, their lives would have been radically transformed. Unfortunately, the governor couldn't see past his own personal ambitions to honor this truth."

Senate Democratic leaders were more blunt in their criticism of the governor.

"He had a chance to do the right thing, and failed miserably," Senate President Steve Sweeney said.

"Don't be fooled by the governor's call for a public referendum or his idea of an ombudsman for civil unions — it is nothing more than a political smoke screen designed to cover the tracks of those retreating from their leadership and lawmaking responsibilities," Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg said. "Civil unions have already proven to be a failure and no ombudsman can change that."

Lambda Legal, a civil rights organization focusing on gay rights issues that last year filed a lawsuit for marriage equality in New Jersey, called Christie's veto "an unfortunate detour" in the quest for gay marriage.

"We are disappointed that Governor Christie did not do what is right for New Jersey families, but we are not discouraged," said Hayley Gorenberg, the group's deputy legal director. "We'll continue to make our case for equality with our plaintiffs in court."

Proponents of the bill said gay marriage is a civil right being denied to gay couples, while opponents said the definition of marriage as a heterosexual institution should not be expanded. The legislation contains a religious opt-out clause, meaning no church clergy would be required to perform gay marriages and places of worship would not have to allow same-sex weddings at their facilities.

Steven Goldstein, chairman of the state's largest gay rights group, Garden State Equality, said Christie's national political ambitions guided his action.

"He won't veto the bill because he's anti-gay," Goldstein said in a statement issued before the veto was issued Friday. "He'll veto the bill because the 2016 South Carolina presidential primary electorate is anti-gay."

Goldstein, who said he has a cordial relationship with the governor, promised to continue fighting him vigorously on the issue. "And we will win, so help me God," he said.

Another gay marriage supporter, Washington state Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire, also reached out to Christie, a practicing Catholic. Gregoire sent the governor a letter last month offering to talk about gay marriage because, in her words, "while I am a Governor, I am also a Catholic."

The Roman Catholic Church opposes same-sex marriage.

Gregoire signed a gay marriage measure into law in Washington on Monday. Her spokeswoman, Karina Shagren, said Christie hasn't responded to the letter.

Thirty states, including South Carolina, have adopted constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriages, most by defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Six states and Washington, D.C., allow gay marriage. Washington state's new gay marriage law is set to go into effect in June.

Lawmakers in New Jersey have until the end of the legislative session in January 2014 to override the veto.

They would need two-thirds of the lawmakers in the Assembly and Senate to agree. Both votes to pass it fell short of that mark. Christie has virtually guaranteed that no override would succeed because Republicans wouldn't cross him.

The Democratic-controlled Legislature has failed in every previous attempt to override Christie, most notably on a cut to women's health care and an effort to reinstate a tax surcharge on millionaires.

Christie — and most Republican lawmakers — want to put the issue to a public vote. One GOP lawmaker, Sen. Kip Bateman of Somerset, has proposed a ballot question asking voters to allow same-sex nuptials. However, the most powerful Democrat in the Legislature, Senate President Steve Sweeney, has said that won't happen.

Democrats are hoping that support for gay marriage — 52 percent for gay marriage, 42 against it, in New Jersey, according to one recent voter poll — will continue growing.

If same-sex couples can't win gay marriage through legislation, they have engaged in a parallel fight in the courts. Seven gay couples and several of their children have sued, claiming that the state's civil union law doesn't work as intended.

Civil unions were designed to provide the benefits of marriage to gay couples without the title. They were adopted after the Supreme Court instructed the Legislature to provide marriage equality to same-sex couples.

The state's own review commission has since found problems with the law, and same-sex couples have backed that up with testimony before the Legislature.

John Grant and Daniel Weiss, an Asbury Park couple who are in a civil union, are among those who testified in support of gay marriage.

When Grant was in a life-threatening automobile accident and rushed to a New York hospital in 2010 — before that state legalized gay marriage — Weiss said he couldn't authorize badly needed surgery or even go through his partner's wallet to find his health insurance card. He said their civil union was essentially worthless; Grant's neurosurgeon even asked, "What is a civil union?"

A gay marriage bill was defeated in the Senate two years ago, just before Gov. Jon Corzine, a Democrat who supported the measure, left office. Advocates' hopes dimmed with the arrival of Christie, who spoke against gay marriage when asked about it during his campaign.

Source: ABC News

The Assembly vote of 42 to 33 followed Senate approval on Monday and increased the scrutiny on Christie, a supporter of Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney who has attempted to deflect controversy by saying the matter should be settled by voters in a referendum.

Both chambers lack the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto by Christie blocking gay marriage, a hot-button social issue that is gaining traction in the 2012 U.S. presidential election campaign.

In Maryland, the House of Delegates delayed until Thursday evening its debate on the contentious "Civil Marriage Protection Act" sponsored by Governor Martin O'Malley, who is seen as a rising star in the Democratic Party.

The bill was passed by two House committees on Tuesday, but it remains unclear if O'Malley and his allies have pulled together the 71 votes needed to clear the full House. Comparable legislation failed to pass a year ago when a number of African-American Democrats joined Republicans in opposing the bill.

O'Malley, a gay marriage supporter, has attempted to sway the black lawmakers, many of whom are hesitant to back an issue opposed by much of Maryland's black clergy.

The action in the Maryland and New Jersey statehouses follows passage of a same-sex marriage bill in Washington state, where Governor Christine Gregoire signed it into law on Monday, but it will not take effect until at least June.

Opponents are working to gather signatures for a ballot initiative in November that would block the law. One group of repeal advocates is also seeking a referendum in early March to put the issue directly to the state's voters.

A federal appeals court in California earlier this month overturned that state's gay marriage ban, enacted through a 2008 ballot initiative. That sets up a possible showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court over the matter.

So far, six states are able to perform same-sex weddings: New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Iowa. Washington is poised to become the seventh, although the law could be blocked by a ballot initiative.

New Jersey's Democratic leadership, which controls both houses of the legislature, has made gay marriage a top priority this session, saying the state's civil union law does not adequately protect same-sex couples.

The initiative now shifts to Christie, who has 45 days to veto the bill but has vowed to do so immediately.

Democrats do not currently appear to have enough votes to override the veto with a two-thirds majority, though they have until the end of 2013 to try.

Source: Reuters