N.J. Stat. » Title 10 — CIVIL RIGHTS
New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 10:5-2 (2026)

Police power, enactment deemed exercise of

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The enactment hereof shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the State for the protection of the public safety, health and morals and to promote the general welfare and in fulfillment of the provisions of the Constitution of this State guaranteeing civil rights.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Smith v. Twp. of East Greenwich, 519 F. Supp. 2d 493 (D.N.J. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Smith v. Twp. of East Greenwich, 519 F. Supp. 2d 493 (D.N.J. 2007). “Smith alleges that the Defendants discriminated against her and retaliated against her in violation of: (a) the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution (Count One); 2 (b) the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”), N.J.S.A. 10:5-2 (Count Two);…”
New Jersey Coalition of Health Care Professionals, Inc. v. New Jersey Dep't of Banking & Ins., 732 A.2d 1063 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1999). “Pomeroy, New Jersey Insurance Law § 10:5-2 at 150 (1998). When enacting a change in policy etched into the common law of our State, the Legislature must speak plainly and clearly.”
NJ Colalition of Health Care v. Dobi, 732 A.2d 1063 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1999). “Pomeroy, New Jersey Insurance Law § 10:5-2 at 150 (1998). When enacting a change in policy etched into the common law of our State, the Legislature must speak plainly and clearly.”
Est. of Leeman v. Eagle Ins., 707 A.2d 1037 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1998). “1990); Craig & Pomeroy, New Jersey Auto Insurance Law, § 10:5-2 at 150. An award for attorney’s fees and costs is at the court’s discretion.”
Wang v. New Jersey State Police, No. 3:18-cv-11933 (D.N.J. Aug. 19, 2019). · cites it 2× “§ 1985 (3) conspiracy with racial animus; (8) violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”), N.J.S.A. § 10:5-2; (9) violation of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act (“NJCRA”), N.”
N. v. North Burlington Cnty. Reg'l Sch. Dist., No. 1:23-cv-01280 (D.N.J. Dec. 29, 2023). · cites it 2× “§ 10:6-2 (“NJCRA”), for invasion of privacy and for an unreasonable search and seizure under the state constitution (Count VIII), proposed SAC ¶ 56; aiding and abetting race discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. § 10:5-2 (“NJLAD”) (Count IX),…”
Joy Spriggs v. City of Plainfield (l-2710-17, Union Cnty. & Statewide), No. A-3690-19 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Jan. 3, 2022). “N.J.S.A. 10:5-2; Viscik v. Fowler Equip. Co.”
Jyotsna Vibhakar v. State of New Jersey (l-2276-16, Mercer Cnty. & Statewide), No. A-1366-20 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. July 6, 2022). “N.J.S.A. 10:5-2; Viscik v. Fowler Equip. Co.”
Reed v. Jersey City, No. 2:21-cv-03921, 2022 WL 1664621 (D.N.J. May 24, 2022). “”) § 10:5-2 ot SEq.; (4) negligent hiring; (5) negligent training; (6) violation of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act (“NJCRA”), N.”
James Pieper v. New Jersey Juv. Just. Comm'n, No. A-0123-23 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 26, 2025). “" N.J.S.A. 10:5-2. To establish a case of discrimination under the LAD, "an employee must 'show that the prohibited consideration .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.