Jurist
DONATE NOW
  • News ▾
    • All Legal News
    • US Legal News
    • World Legal News
    • This Day @ Law
  • Dispatches ▾
    • All Dispatches
    • Afghanistan
    • Canada
    • EU
    • Ghana
    • India
    • Iran
    • Israel
    • Italy
    • Kazakhstan
    • Kenya
    • Myanmar
    • Pakistan
    • Peru
    • Romania
    • Sri Lanka
    • Taiwan
    • UK
    • Ukraine
    • US
  • Commentary ▾
    • All Commentary
    • Faculty Commentary
    • Professional Commentary
    • Student Commentary
  • Features ▾
    • All Features
    • Explainers
    • Long Reads
    • Multimedia
    • Interviews
  • Topics
  • Rule of Law ▾
    • Materials
    • Podcasts
  • About ▾
    • FAQ
    • Staff
    • Awards
    • Apply
    • Journalist in Residence
    • Board of Directors
    • Contact Us
  • Donate ▾
    • Why Support JURIST?
    • Donate
    • Honor Roll
New Jersey court upholds same-sex marriage ban News
New Jersey court upholds same-sex marriage ban
Jamie Sterling
June 14, 2005 03:08:00 pm

[JURIST] A New Jersey appellate court Tuesday ruled against seven same-sex couples who had argued that they were entitled to marry under the state constitution [text]. The court ruling [PDF text] upheld a lower court decision that had concluded that state legislators must first change marriage laws [JURIST report] in New Jersey before same-sex marriages would be allowed. AP has more.

Law students to join jurist
GET OUR DAILY DIGEST
LinkedIn YouTube Instagram Facebook RSS Twitter
Latest DISPATCHES
Taiwan dispatch: Ministry condemns China after Kenya blocks delegates from Ocean Conference

Taiwan dispatch: Ministry condemns China after Kenya blocks delegates from Ocean Conference

Ghana dispatch: former finance minister granted permanent residence in the US, thwarting extradition efforts

Ghana dispatch: former finance minister granted permanent residence in the US, thwarting extradition efforts

Latest COMMENTARY
When Authority Becomes Ownership: Parastoo Ahmadi and the Drift of Iranian Law

When Authority Becomes Ownership: Parastoo Ahmadi and the Drift of Iranian Law

by AmirAli Maleki
Who Gets to Belong? Indonesia’s Minority Faiths and the Limits of Legal Protection

Who Gets to Belong? Indonesia’s Minority Faiths and the Limits of Legal Protection

by Professor Laras Susanti | Universitas Gadjah Mada
Latest FEATURES
Disenfranchisement as punishment: Ghana weighs democratic order against an inalienable vote

Disenfranchisement as punishment: Ghana weighs democratic order against an inalienable vote

The Legal Architecture of Reparations: A Conversation with Kwesi Pratt Jnr.

The Legal Architecture of Reparations: A Conversation with Kwesi Pratt Jnr.

THIS DAY @ LAW

Canada passes first Citizenship Act

On June 23, 1946, Canada's first Citizenship Act received royal assent, establishing Canadian citizenship as distinct from British subject status. Learn more about the Citizenship Act, 1946 from the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21.  

Federal Housing Administration created

On June 27, 1934, the National Housing Act created the Federal Housing Administration (now part of HUD), which put the power of the federal government behind home financing, helping to make homeownership a reality for tens of millions of Americans and powering the residential real estate industry.

ICJ decides LaGrand Case, Germany v. U.S.

On June 27, 2001, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in the LaGrand case that foreign nationals must be informed of their right to contact the embassy of their home country after arrest. Brothers Karl and Walter LaGrand were arrested in 1982 for murder and armed robbery in Arizona. However, authorities did not inform the men of their right to assistance from the German consulate under the terms of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1999 upheld the convictions in Germany v. US. Germany then brought the issue before the ICJ, which issued a provisional order to stay the executions. Arizona nonetheless executed the LaGrand brothers in 1999. Two years later, the ICJ held that the US had violated both the provisional order and the Vienna Convention.

Jurist
Home Attributions Disclaimer Privacy Policy Contact Us
Copyright © 2026, JURIST Legal News & Research Services, Inc.
JURISTnews is a collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh