@dlew
Maybe we are talking past each other?
The point I am making is that it will be incredibly disruptive if Obergefell was overturned because even LEFT COAST CALIFORNIA has laws on the books that would negate all the gay marriages in their state. I think the best argument that the court won't overturn it is it is an administrative state nightmare to dissolve that many marriages overnight.
Now it is pretty easy to believe that California would act quickly to reverse that, but you are confusing public polling with the legislative or ballot process that would need to occur to proactively support gay marriage as a political question after it had just been overturned by the Supreme Court. I think that would be a much bigger lift, than you are implying.
Anyways, this is of course all hypothetical but I think you should probably think about how difficult it is to pass even very popular pieces of legislation and agree that this would probably be contentious in many states.
Yeah I have reconsidered. If Obergefell (oberge)fell tomorrow, it would be a bit of a shitshow in a lot of places (at least for a while), notwithstanding the broad (and becoming broader) bipartisan support for gay marriage.
That said, given that Obergefell is still good law today, and only one lone justice hinted at even granting a challenging case cert, i think it's a ways off from being left to the states. In the meantime (and in light of Dobbs), i think states would be wise to start getting some state legislation going, even if it's redundant in the interim.
fwiw, i think the bolded part of your quote is wrong