Marriage Equality in NJ - the opinion

The actual decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court in Mark Lewis and Dennis Winslow, et al. v. Gwendolyn L. Harris, etc., et al. (A-68-05) is 90 pages long, but fortunately the Clerk provides a summary, which in itself is interesting. My favorite:

11. The State does not argue that limiting marriage to the union of a man and a woman is needed to encourage procreation or to create the optimal living environment for children. Other than sustaining the traditional definition of marriage, which is not implicated in this discussion, the State has not articulated any legitimate public need for depriving committed same-sex couples of the host of benefits and privileges that are afforded to married heterosexual couples. There is, on the one hand, no rational basis for giving gays and lesbians full civil rights as individuals while, on the other hand, giving them an incomplete set of rights when they enter into committed samesex relationships. To the extent that families are strengthened by encouraging monogamous relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual, the Court cannot discern a public need that would justify the legal disabilities that now afflict same-sex domestic partnerships.

If my reading is right, the entire court agreed that at least a structure providing equal rights must be provided, under the NJ constitution, and gave the legislature 180 days to create it, either by allowing marriage of same-sex couples, or creating a separate-but-equal civil unions structure.

Three of the seven justices of the court took the stronger position that the constitution required that same-sex couples had a constitutional right to state-sanctioned civil marriage.