No Dissent in Jersey Decision

Although media outlets have reported that the New Jersey Supreme Court decision was "close," (a 4-3 decision) they have not yet noted that at least one of the dissenting justices did so because he felt the court should have gone FARTHER in providing equality. Chief Justice Portiz agreed that “denying the rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples that are statutorily given to their heterosexual counterparts violates the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution." However, she went on to say: "I can find no principled basis, however, on which to distinguish those rights and benefits from the right to the title of marriage, and therefore dissent from the majority’s opinion insofar as it declines to recognize that right among all of the other rights and benefits that will be available to same-sex couples in the future." In fact, I can find no truly dissenting opinion. I will look harder, but for now, it appears equality won a bigger victory than was even first thought. (UPDATE: Turns out there is no dissent -- four justices voted for full equality, but suggest the Legislature decide what it is to be called, while the "dissenting" three wanted to go straight to allowing same-sex marriage.)