Gov. Paterson has directed all state agencies to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The governor's legal counsel instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere "should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union."
Source: New York Times
Read the article here.
Mombian has a post today regarding a recent Washington Post Article on same-sex divorces. The article highlights several areas where the law is unsettled and same-sex couples are at a disadvantage, such as:
Read the Mombian Post here and the Washington Post article here (free registration may be required).
Governor Mitt Romney, filed suit Friday to force the Massachusetts legislature to vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. On November 9th, the legislature voted to recess a constitutional convention before the matter was taken up. Massachusetts law requires two votes by the legislature before the measure appears on a ballot. Proponents assert that the vote for a recess was a deliberate attempt to avoid an up or down vote on the amendment by citizens. Read more about it here.
Technorati Tags: Nontraditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
According to the Wills, Trust and Estates Prof Blog, two law professors have written an article proposing a Uniform Domestic Partnership Act modeled after uniform business partnership acts. They contend that marriage as it stands today fails to fulfill the expectations of most families - traditional and nontraditional. Their proposal would allow parties to select from several forms of domestic partnerships and leave marriage under the control of religious institutions.
The abstract for their article states:
"For decades, Americans have argued about who may marry and what marriage actually means in legal, religious, and philosophical terms. For almost as long, two problems - the rising divorce rate and the poverty of some “divorced” children and their custodians - have fed concerns about the viability of marriage as an institution that promotes domestic stability and economic security. This Article explores the notion that domestic partnership based upon business partnership law would better serve more couples, their families, and society as a whole. It proposes a Uniform Domestic Partnership Act, loosely modeled after the UPA, as a substitute for marriage and recommends that marriage continue, without legal significance, under the exclusive control of religious institutions. By demonstrating that modern couples expect civil marriage to provide something different than couples did historically and by adapting business partnership law approaches to areas such as fiduciary duty, agency and transaction costs, and limited liability, this Article proposes a legal structure for domestic enterprises. Actually, it offers four new solutions: the Filial, the Enduring, the Caregiving, and the Provisional Domestic Partnerships."
Drobac, Jennifer Ann and Page, Antony, "A Uniform Domestic Partnership Act: Marrying Business Partnership and Family Law" . Georgia Law Review, 2007 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=929269
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Civil Union, Domestic Partnership, Nontraditional Family
New Jersey's recent court ruling was a big step, but according to Lambda Legal, it represents just a first step. They contend that "... a civil union is a separate, confusing legal idea that divides us from our friends and neighbors, rather than bringing us together as equals. We agree with Chief Justice Poritz, who wrote in her dissent, “Labels set people apart as surely as physical separation on a bus or in school facilities.”" (Source Lambda Legal email newsletter October 26, 2006)
Want to know more about the ruling and how it might affect you? Some common questions and answers are:
What does the decision mean?
The court ruled that same-sex couples and their families have a constitutional right to the same benefits as heterosexual families. It ordered New Jersey’s Legislature to pass legislation providing these benefits and protections to same-sex couples within 180 days.
When does the law go into effect?
The court’s decision is effective as of April 23, 2007. By that time, the state legislature must adopt legislation to provide equal benefits and protections to same-sex couples.
What about non-residents?
New Jersey does not have a residency requirement for marriage. The court ruled that it cannot be any more difficult to enter into a civil union than into a marriage. S,o out-of-state couples will be able go to New Jersey to marry or enter into a civil union, depending on how the state legislature proceeds. However, your marriage or civil union might not be recognized in your home state.
These questions and answers were adapted from the very helpful list on the Human Rights Campaign website.
If you are a New Jersey resident and want to find out what you can do, click here to contact your legislators.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
The New Jersey Supreme Court has just ruled that denying same-sex couples the right to marry is unconstitutional. The ruling directs the legislature to fix the inequality. The New Jersey legislature must act within 180 days.
From the decision:
Only rights that are deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people are deemed to be fundamental. Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this State, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution. With this State’s legislative and judicial commitment to eradicating sexual orientation discrimination as our backdrop, we now hold that denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples that are statutorily given to their heterosexual counterparts violates the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1. To comply with this constitutional mandate, the Legislature must either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure, which will provide for, on equal terms, the rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples. We will not presume that a separate statutory scheme, which uses a title other than marriage, contravenes equal protection principles, so long as the rights and benefits of civil marriage are made equally available to same-sex couples. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to same sex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process. (emphasis added)
Read more about it and download the opinion at Lambda Legal.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
This year, eight states have ballot measures to amend their constitutions to ban same sex marriage: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin. When 11 states voted to ban same-sex marriage in 2004, the majority percentages in support were 60-70%. This year's measures have only slim majorities in support of the ban. Why? Most agree that the opponents of such bans have done a better job organizing and educating voters. Other reasons include voter focus on other issues such as Iraq and court cases upholding bans on same-sex marriage.
The issue is complicated in states like Colorado, which has two measures on the ballot. One would add a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and the other creates a legal structure of rights for same-sex couples in civil unions. Advocates of the civil union proposal maintain that its okay to define marriage as an institution for heterosexuals, but it is unfair to withhold legal rights from those in civil unions. Opponents say that view is a smokescreen.
Read more at the -The New York Times Online
Technorati Tags: Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
