EBIA Weekly Archives

New Jersey Becomes 14th State to Extend Marriage Rights to Same-Sex Couples

From the October 24, 2013 EBIA Weekly

[Garden State Equality v. Dow, 2013 WL 5687193 (N.J. 2013); Garden State Equality v. Dow, 2013 WL 5397372 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 2013)]

N.J. Sup. Ct. Denial of Stay

Trial Court Ruling

State’s Withdrawal of Appeal

Based on a state trial court decision overturning the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, New Jersey has become the 14th state to allow marriage by same-sex couples. (Same-sex marriage is also allowed in the District of Columbia.) As background, the trial court ruling focused on the interaction between the U.S. Supreme Court’s Windsor decision (see our article) and a 2006 ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court that same-sex couples in committed relationships were entitled under the state constitution to the same rights and benefits as married couples of the opposite sex. Following that 2006 ruling, the state legislature enacted a civil union law that passed constitutional muster by providing same-sex couples with the rights—but not the title—of marriage. But in the wake of the Windsor decision and the demise of Section 3 of DOMA, the state trial court concluded that couples in civil unions were once again being denied the rights of marriage because of the various federal benefits that are now extended to married same-sex couples but not to couples in civil unions (see, for example, our articles on recent guidance from the IRS and DOL). The state trial court therefore ruled that the state must extend the right to civil marriage to same-sex couples and refused to delay enforcement of the order pending the state’s appeal. After the state Supreme Court likewise refused to delay enforcement, citing the state’s inability to demonstrate a “reasonable probability or likelihood of success on the merits,” the state withdrew its appeal.

EBIA Comment: New Jersey is the first state since Windsor to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples. The New Jersey Supreme Court noted that Windsor and subsequent agency rulings “changed the landscape” by providing federal benefits to married same-sex couples and causing the state’s civil union law to no longer achieve its purpose of providing equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples. It will be interesting to observe as similar lawsuits move forward in other states. For more information, see EBIA’s Employee Benefits for Domestic Partners at Section II (“Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships Under Federal and State Law”). You may also be interested in our recorded web seminar “Supreme Court Invalidates DOMA: Impacts for Employer-Sponsored Plans.”

Contributing Editors: EBIA Staff.