## Facts

- Seven committed same-sex couples applied for marriage licenses in New Jersey and were denied under the State’s marriage statutes.
- The couples sued New Jersey officials in their official capacities, alleging violations of the New Jersey Constitution’s liberty and equal protection guarantees.
- Plaintiffs sought access to civil marriage and the full set of legal rights and benefits attached to marriage.
- The Law Division granted summary judgment to the State, rejecting both the liberty and equal-protection claims.
- The Appellate Division affirmed.
- The New Jersey Supreme Court granted review and considered whether exclusion from marriage, and from marriage-linked legal incidents, was constitutionally permissible.

## Issues

1. Whether the New Jersey Constitution’s liberty guarantee protects a fundamental right of same-sex couples to marry.
2. Whether denying same-sex couples the rights and benefits associated with civil marriage violates equal protection under the New Jersey Constitution.
3. If equal protection is violated, whether the Constitution requires use of the term “marriage,” or permits an alternative legal status providing identical rights and benefits.

## Decision

- The court held that same-sex marriage was not a fundamental right protected by the state constitutional liberty guarantee and rejected the liberty-based claim.
- The court held that equal protection requires committed same-sex couples be afforded the same rights and benefits provided to married different-sex couples.
- The court declared the existing statutory scheme unconstitutional to the extent it denied same-sex couples those rights and benefits.
- The court ordered the Legislature to act within 180 days to either:
  - amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples, or
  - enact a parallel legal structure that provides the same rights and benefits as marriage.
- A three-justice concurrence/dissent agreed on the equal-protection violation but would have required the State to use the term “marriage,” reasoning that a separate label would deny full equality.

## Legal Principles

- The state constitutional liberty guarantee did not, as applied, require recognition of same-sex marriage as a fundamental right.
- Equal protection under the New Jersey Constitution prohibits the State from conferring a broad set of legal protections and benefits through marriage while categorically denying equivalent protections and benefits to similarly situated same-sex couples without sufficient justification.
- Tradition and procreation-related rationales were insufficient to justify withholding the civil rights and legal incidents associated with marriage from committed same-sex couples.
- As a remedy for an equal-protection violation, the Legislature may be directed to provide substantive equality of rights and benefits, while the court may leave the terminology (e.g., “marriage” versus another status) to legislative choice.

## Conclusion

The New Jersey Supreme Court required that same-sex couples receive the full rights and benefits afforded to married different-sex couples under equal protection, but it did not hold that the state constitution itself mandated the specific label “marriage,” instead directing the Legislature to implement an equal legal status within 180 days.


Lewis v. Harris, 908 A.2d 196 (N.J. 2006)