N.J., Pa. to become battlegrounds for same-sex marriage following DOMA ruling, advocates say

The high court's decision this week has sparked a renewed interest in the push for same-sex marriage in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Standing Thursday on the steps of the Statehouse in Trenton, Garden State Equality executive director Troy Stevenson made his intentions clear to a crowd of supporters.

"I'm going to stand before you today and say whether it's through litigation or legislation, I promise you with no reservation that New Jersey will have marriage equality before the end of this year," Stevenson said.

Garden State Equality called the impromptu rally following Wednesday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act, a 5-4 decision that ruled married same-sex couples should receive the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples.

The high court's decision this week has reinvigorated same-sex marriage supporters in the Garden State and sparked a push for same-sex marriage in neighboring Pennsylvania, where state Reps. Brian Sims and Steve McCarter announced their plans to introduce same-sex marriage legislation in Harrisburg.

Sims and McCarter are Democrats from the Philadelphia area. A bill similar to theirs has also been proposed in the state Senate.

Sims, who is gay, said in a prepared statement that "it is past time" for Pennsylvania to join others that have already established same-sex marriage, particularly the bordering states of New York, Maryland and Delaware.

"Marriage equality has steadily grown, now standing at majority support in recent Pennsylvania polls," Sims said. "I believe that more and more legislators from both parties will decide to be on the right side of history."

'Shouldn't be a partisan issue'

Adrian Shanker, president of Equality Pennsylvania, said that legislation like what's being proposed by Sims and McCarter is a step in the right direction, but feels that bringing same-sex marriage to the state is still a long-term prospect and "probably not (happening) this year."

"We have our work cut out for us in terms of fighting for equality under the law in Pennsylvania," said Shanker, a Bethlehem resident.

Shanker said he hopes that the issue doesn't end up boiling down to party lines in Harrisburg and Washington.

"It doesn't have to be a partisan issue," Shanker said. "It shouldn't be a partisan issue."

Following the court's ruling Wednesday, U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Lehigh Valley, issued a statement inferring that he would not be rushing to judgment on the matter.

"The full impact of this ruling on Pennsylvanians remains unclear," Dent said. "At this moment, this ruling raises as many questions as it answers. In the coming days, I and others will be analyzing this ruling to determine its impact and I will have more to say about it then."

Dent's office declined further comment on the issue Friday.

N.J. Republicans say top court overstepped

Party lines already seem drawn in New Jersey on same-sex marriage.

In February 2012, a same-sex marriage bill sponsored by Assembylman Reed Gusciora, a Democrat whose 15th District covers parts of Hunterdon County, passed through the Assembly and Senate, but was vetoed by Gov. Christie in favor of putting it on a ballot for voters to decide.

Though Gusciora, who is one of two openly gay legislators in the state, has attempted to drum up support for an override of Christie's veto, both the governor and other Republican state legislators have stood firm in their opposition.

State Sen. Michael Doherty, a Republican whose 23rd District covers parts of Hunterdon and Warren counties, has previously said that he stands by Christie on the issue. He did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

"I think the people of New Jersey should have the ability to decide this issue," Doherty, an outspoken supporter of traditional marriage, previously told The Express-Times.

Steve Lonegan, the U.S. Senate candidate Doherty is supporting in the state's upcoming special election, argued last week that lawmaking is the responsibility of legislatures, not "unelected judges."

Wednesday’s "decision is the unfortunate result of an activist, liberal court that has little respect for the Constitution and our nation’s founding principles," Lonegan said in a statement. "While I believe government should not be in the business of marriage, it is not the Supreme Court’s responsibility to make that decision."

Gay legislator OK with Christie's ballot idea

Christie has stepped up his rhetoric in the wake of the court's ruling. In a radio appearance Wednesday night on NJ 101.15 FM, he called it the decision "incredibly insulting" to the members of Congress who voted for DOMA in 1996 and noted that he'd veto a similar bill again if he had to.

“It’s just another example of judicial supremacy rather than having the government run by the people we actually vote for,” Christie said on the show. “I thought it was a bad decision.”

Gusciora has continuously said he's willing to take Christie up on his ballot offer. That proposition is not as widely supported by same-sex marriage advocates, many of whom on Thursday scoffed at Gusciora's idea by chanting "No ballot for civil rights."

"I also challenge us to take it to the streets," Gusciora told the crowd last week in Trenton. "Put it on the ballot."