NJ Assembly Committee Advances CU Bill

December 11, 2006

New Jersey Law Journal
by Michael Booth

The New Jersey Assembly Judiciary Committee on Thursday recommended passage of legislation that would allow same-sex couples to enter into civil unions but explicitly avoids mention of the word marriage.

After hours of testimony from same-sex couples and advocates who say the bill fails to meet their expectations, and conservative religious grsoups that want no civil unions, the committee passed the measure, voting along party lines, 4-2.

The 64-page bill, A-3787, was fashioned in response to the state Supreme Court's Oct. 25 ruling in Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 415, which gave the Legislature 180 days to grant same-sex couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples — by amending the marital laws or creating civil unions similar to those permitted in Vermont.

Sponsor Wilfredo Caraballo, D-Essex, and committee Chairwoman Linda Greenstein, D-Middlesex, said they would have preferred the first route but were realistic that such a measure had little change of passage in either house.

A Quinnipiac University poll made public Thursday reported that 60 percent of New Jersey residents favor civil unions with 35 percent opposed, while only 50 percent want to permit gay marriage.

This is a very good bill, said Caraballo. It's not the end, but it's a good place to start.

Gov. Jon Corzine has said he would sign whatever legislation passes both houses, so long as it grants same-sex couples equal rights. He said he prefers the civil unions bill.

No one at Thursday's hearing testified in favor of the legislation. Same-sex advocacy groups and couples went first, and urged the committee to vote against the bill, arguing that it would create second-class citizenship for the state's 20,000 same-sex couples.

Steven Goldstein, executive director of Garden State Equality, thanked Caraballo for at least trying to write legislation that attempts to grant same-sex couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples, but fears it would not go far enough.

Goldstein is the legal guardian of his 42-year-old, severely autistic brother and said that if something happens to his parents or to him, he hopes his partner would be able to take over. But even if Caraballo's bill became law, he is not sure that would happen.

I live in fear every day that because we don't have the word 'marriage' ... some government official will say, 'I don't care about your civil union, said Goldstein. My brother will become a ward of the State.

Stephen Hyland, a Princeton and Westmont attorney, provides estate planning for same-sex couples and said flaws in the bill needed to be addressed before it is voted on. Most of the problems, he said, involve Caraballo's reliance on the Vermont civil union statute in that the New Jersey version includes legal language that is not used here.

Caraballo said the legislation had been amended since its introduction to address those concerns.

Edward Barocas, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said the bill impermissibly created a second-class tier of citizens.

It's a separate system and label, said Barocas. If we were doing this based on race, we would be decrying it and calling it abhorent. Separate is never equal.

David Buckel, the senior counsel for the New York-based Lamda Legal Defense Fund who argued on behalf of the same-sex plaintiss in Lewis v. Harris, said those couples, as well as others, want to be able to say they are married.

The name of 'marriage' is important, said Buckel. This bill creates discriminatory civil unions.

Conservative religious leaders then lined up to oppose the bill as well, but for othe reasons. They also derided the Court for inserting itself into the legislative process and forcing societal changes without public support.

The Court gutted the constitution, said John Tomicki, representing the New Jersey Coalition to Preserve and Protect Marriage and the Leaguge of American Families. You have the right to say no to the courts.

He urged the committee, without success, to slow down and closely examine the bill before taking action.

The hearing took an ugly turn at one point. After a woman involved in a same-sex relationship testified alongside her two young children, a man in the audience began yelling child abuse as she left the committee room.

The committee's two Republicans &mdash former Chairman David Russo of Bergen County and Christopher Connors of Ocean County — cast the two opposing votes. The measure now goes to the full Assembly for consideration. Senate President Richard Codey, D-Essex, and Sen. Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen, are sponsoring an identical version, S-2407, in the Senate, and teh Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to consider it on Mondayy.

The Legislation attempts to be as comprehensive as possible in ensuring there are no gaps in legal rights.

The bill specifically outlines that members of same-sex partnerships will have full rights to partners' insurance, health care decisions, benefits, tax breaks and the like.

Those applying for a civil union license would have to meet the same statutory requirements as those applying for a marriage license, and would have to pay the same $28 fee.

In the statement, the sponsor indicated that the bill is meant to be read liberally and that the rights listed are not necessarily complete. The bill enumerates some legal benefits, protections and responsibilities of spouses which would apply in like manner to the parties in a civil union, however, this list should not be construed to be an exclusive list of such benefits, it says.

The same people who perform marriages would be allowed to perform civil union ceremonies. Prenuptial agreements between same-sex partners would be viewed the same as those entered into by heterosexual couples. Dissolution of civil unions and equitable distribution would be treated equally, as would child custody and visitation.

The bill would go into effect 60 days after being signed.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.stephenhyland.com/blawg/mt/mt-tb.cgi/84