Chris Christie | Gay Marriage | Gay Rights | New Jersey | News

NJ Governor Chris Christie Makes Final Case To Delay Implementation Of Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

On September 27th, a New Jersey judge, Mary Jacobsen, ruled that same-sex marriage must be made legal now that the federal government recognizes it. Now, Chris Christie and his administration have made a last ditch effort to delay the legalization of marriage, which would go into effect on October 21st. Governor Christie, who believes that marriage should be put to the ballot and vetoed a marriage equality bill last year, filed with the state on Monday.

ChrischristieThe Associated Press reports:

In a filing Monday, the state says allowing gay couples to marry starting in two weeks would make it difficult for the state's top court to reverse course should it agree with the Christie administration's anti-gay marriage stand.

The administration wants implementation of the ruling by Judge Mary Jacobson in Trenton delayed while higher courts consider the appeal.

Gay rights advocates say no stay should be granted because couples are hurt by a delay. Monday's filing came in response to their opposition to the delay.

What do you think of Christie's argument? Does it hold water, or will Judge Jacobsen's ruling stand? 

 

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. he's a political whore who doesn't give a damn about his fellow new jerseyans, and/or is imposing his religion on all nj citizens

    Posted by: r | Oct 8, 2013 5:20:05 PM


  2. The Court is not going to agree with the Christie administration's arguments because they are idiotic, as even Christie knows. The delay of the inevitable--marriage equality In NJ via Court or veto override--is about one thing and one thing only: the big guy's 2016 primary ambitions. Never mind that he'll never be President.

    Posted by: Ernie | Oct 8, 2013 5:27:29 PM


  3. The Supreme Court of New Jersey already ruled on this issue in 2006 in Lewis v. Harris. They were quite clear that the state had to provide either civil unions or marriages. They haven't changed their mind. Christie's argument won't stand.

    Posted by: NotSafeForWork | Oct 8, 2013 5:27:30 PM


  4. Ernie, you are spot on. Christie can, and will point to his ministrationsto get the nod from the Rethugs when he runs and that is the only reason he's fighting tooth and nail.

    Posted by: Truthteller | Oct 8, 2013 5:31:28 PM


  5. Footnote to NSFW:

    Remember that the NJ Supreme Court said the state had to provide equal rights to same-sex couples. Now that DOMA is gone, civil unions don't cut it because the fed doesn't recognize them.

    Christie's blowing smoke.

    Posted by: Hunter | Oct 8, 2013 5:34:44 PM


  6. Exactly, Hunter. Post-DOMA Christie can't seriously argue that CUs fulfill the 2006 Court ruling. So he's put forth sham arguments as a delay tactic, all the while calling for an unnecessary referendum, each completely fabricated to meet his political ambitions. He doesn't give a damn about the issue itself.

    Posted by: Ernie | Oct 8, 2013 5:47:35 PM


  7. @Hunter

    Correct. The state met the direction of the court by establishing civil unions, which the governor at that time signed off. This challenge is an offshoot of that forward movement brought on as you said by the fall of DOMA.

    The point is if the SCONJ was OK with either civil unions or marriage in 2006, then they will be OK with marriage today.

    Christie's argument won't stand, if the SCONJ even hears the case.

    Posted by: NotSafeForWork | Oct 8, 2013 5:49:01 PM


  8. I really don't think it's unreasonable to put a stay on the decision until it makes it's way to the SCoNJ. If so many people are convinced that they will ultimately uphold the decision, I don't see the problem. Then once the SCofNJ makes their decision, that will put an end to the matter once and for all.

    Posted by: wheelie81 | Oct 8, 2013 5:57:49 PM


  9. Why don't we put the rights of morbidly obese people to a vote?

    Posted by: Frank | Oct 8, 2013 6:04:16 PM


  10. I think Christie is in a freak out mood because this is an election period, and he is showing that he is not the leader he pretended to be.

    Posted by: Daniel Leyva | Oct 8, 2013 6:04:18 PM


  11. There is no reason or need for a stay. There is a lawful order by a state judge that should be carried out.

    Posted by: NotSafeForWork | Oct 8, 2013 6:05:43 PM


  12. I knew Christie's political career wouldn't go much further, but I didn't expect it to tank this soon. He is wrong on the issues and he is loosing his political capital on them.

    Posted by: Jay | Oct 8, 2013 6:11:03 PM


  13. Just replace the word gay with interracial and see if its sound.

    Posted by: Michael | Oct 8, 2013 6:12:30 PM


  14. They're just delaying the inevitable. This is where politics really sucks. Christie must be able to go to his conservative base and say he tried -- which is what he's doing here with the appeal -- even though he knows it's just a matter of time.

    Posted by: will | Oct 8, 2013 7:01:05 PM


  15. Porky needs to move on. It's a losing battle...and his "delaying tactics" are only that (which is obvious) and even he knows.

    Posted by: Geoff | Oct 8, 2013 7:13:17 PM


  16. His ego is as fat as his ass. He is a disdainful, unattractive, combative jackass who is raising hell now because he was never popular in school.

    Posted by: Stanhope | Oct 8, 2013 7:21:23 PM


  17. Since same-sex marriage exists in Canada, New England, New York, Maryland, DC, etc., it is absurd to pretend that it is something awful that should be kept out of New Jersey.

    Trying to postpone the inevitable. Selfish person thinking of himself only, but he isn't going to President anyhow, so he'd do better by trying to be a decent person, but he isn't going to.

    Posted by: Fester | Oct 8, 2013 7:27:41 PM


  18. I think Christie would actually like the court to rule against him, because even he probably realizes it's inevitable in "the civil union, separate-but-not-equal" states like NJ, so then he could claim "judicial activism" did him in, which always appeals to the wingnuts. IOW, gets him off the hook sooner rather than later, but he's not to blame.

    Posted by: Fox | Oct 8, 2013 7:46:41 PM


  19. I fully believe he knows there is really not anything left for him to achieve. This seems like he's holding on to the concept any future campaigning he will do can feature his "let the people decide" mentality which allows people's individual biases to take precedent in unrelated individual's lives. He does not recognize what equality is in so that he refuses to allow any protection to a minority by exposing them to the flawed decision making of a majority. This has always been the sign of an individual who should not have any governing power or decision making simply by the fact he has little respect to all those which he is charged to serve.

    Posted by: TODD | Oct 8, 2013 9:59:32 PM


  20. This dude is evil...and a presidential hopeful. Not a good combo.

    Posted by: fern | Oct 8, 2013 10:02:35 PM


  21. YOU DO NOT PUT CIVIL RIGHTS TO A VOTE YOU STUPID F*CK! THERE WOULD STILL BE SLAVERY, SEPARATE WATER COOLERS AND SEATS IN BACK OF BUSES LABELED JUST FOR A PREVIOUSLY OPPRESSED SEGMENT OF SOCIETY IF CIVIL RIGHTS HAD BEEN VOTED IN PAST. AND WOMEN, THEY WOULD STILL BE IN THE KITCHEN RAISIN' DEM BABIES THAT STRAIGHT PARENTS DON'T WANT ANYMORE. OR MAYBE, WE SHOULD ALLOW A PUBLIC VOTE TO DISALLOW MORBIDLY OBESE F*CKS FROM RUNNING FOR ANY PUBLIC OFFICE.

    Posted by: ToThePoint | Oct 8, 2013 10:09:47 PM


  22. He's behind the times and sadly thinks this position will help him with social conservatives who support the most un-electable candidates in the GOP Presidential primary.

    Posted by: Joe in Ct | Oct 9, 2013 12:03:20 AM


  23. It's up to the Supreme Court of New Jersey to decide if they need time to consider Christie's appeal. If they do, it makes sense for them to stay the ruling. If they don't, they can summarily dismiss the request, much as SCOTUS summarily dismissed Cuccinelli's request to uphold Virginia's sodomy statute.

    As a Californian, I had to wait 4-1/2 years for the courts to void Prop 8. Courts move slower than legislatures (or referenda), but the payoff is that their word is final.

    Posted by: Rich | Oct 9, 2013 12:36:18 AM


  24. My governor is a sad man and a Bully! In an updated story, he also had a debate earlier today with his Democratic competitor and said something stupid about having gay family members and friends, but still opposed same-sex marriage.

    Posted by: SouthJerseySteve | Oct 9, 2013 12:45:42 AM


  25. NJ has been waiting since 2006, Rich, when the NJ SC ruled that gay couples must be treated equally to straight couples. The case challenging CUs as unequal has been in the works for quite a while already; it's just that post-DOMA the solution to fulfilling the 2006 court mandate is completely obvious.

    The request for a stay makes no sense except as a Christie political talking point. And, since NJ would already have equality were it not for his veto pen, it's unreasonable that one man with fat ambitions is holding equality hostage.

    Posted by: Ernie | Oct 9, 2013 4:22:53 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «CA GOP Backs Repeal Of Transgender Student Protections Law« «