The New Jersey Senate passed a bill 24-16 to legalize same-sex marriage in the state. The assembly affirmed this action by voting 42-33. The passage sent the bill straight to Republican Gov. Chris Christie’s desk to sign into law, but the buck stopped there.

Just one day after the Senate passed the bill, the governor kept his vow of taking ‘very swift action’ and vetoed the bill, squashing any hopes for marriage equality in the near future.

‘I am adhering to what I’ve said since this bill was first introduced — an issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide,’ the bombastic governor said calling for a state referendum. ‘I continue to encourage the Legislature to trust the people of New Jersey and seek their input by allowing our citizens to vote on a question that represents a profoundly significant societal change.’

Though the politically motivated move bolsters Christie’s conservative credentials for a possible future presidential run, it kicks the can of equal rights further down the road and undermines the state’s democratic process.

Proponents of the bill say civil unions are not a sufficient remedy. Under the current law, same- sex couples can file state taxes in New Jersey as a couple but must file federal taxes as if they are single. Though the law implies civil unions would carry the same benefits as marriage, unclear communication from the state government has led many employers to fail to recognize these rights when providing families with health care. Simply put, civil unions may imply fairness under the law, but in reality create a second-class citizen in the eyes of others.

A recent Rutgers University poll shows 53 percent of the state’s voters are in favor of same-sex marriage, while 44 percent oppose it. Without a super majority in the Senate or the assembly, it does not appear there is any way for Democrats to override Christie. So while a referendum does have a good chance of passing, the veto effectively delays equal rights for thousands of same-sex couples.

The governor’s move comes in the wake of other mixed messages sent from states across the country. New York joined the ranks of six other states this summer by passing a bill that recognizes same-sex marriages in the state and even goes further to recognize those out of state as well. Thirty-nine other states have laws prohibiting it.

Even still, the rest of the state governments can make up their minds. In California, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the state’s constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, also known as Prop 8. The problem is that they failed to make a decisive ruling on the issue, with Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt writing that Prop 8 only violated the state’s Equal Protection Act, but not as a constitutional right for every citizen. A more definitive ruling would have sent the issue directly to the Supreme Court.

The two sides of the issue are forcefully gaining momentum, but by continuing to send unclear messages, officials are only compounding the differences. As New Jersey and other states have proven, civil unions are not an effective solution to the problem.

The government should recognize its people’s right to make their own decisions and support them equally for whatever decisions they do make. Or they could ignore those rights. Either way, Christie’s veto is a slap in the face to those who successfully went through the democratic process available to them in an attempt to change an important part of our law.

Stephen Fox is a graduate student studying for his master’s degree in entrepreneurship and a graduate of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. His columns appear weekly. He can be reached at smfox03@syr.edu. 

Published on February 23, 2012 at 12:00 pm