Bear in mind that "federal power" not only covers federal laws made by Congress but also includes rulings by the USSC. Abortion, sodomy, eminent domain, free speech issues (nude dancing), religious displays, etc., were all USSC decisions imposed on the states. Congress had nothing to do with it.
So, it's possible that same-sex marriage will come about because of some "rights" issue decided by the USSC, not necessarily a law. Rather than an amendment, I'd like to see Congress pass a law stripping courts of jurisdiction to rule on same-sex marriage cases.
Yes, and with the exception of imminent domain, which the court will no doubt revisit soon, the rest were issues of the rights of individuals. Whenever the court looks at the powers of the state measured against the constitutional rights of the people, it will frequently side with the people if the state cannot articulate a legitimate reason for curtailing activities of one group that are permitted for another. Do I agree with the USSC every time. No. But I do agree with the process, since frequently the courts are the only protector of the rights of the minority.
So, it's possible that same-sex marriage will come about because of some "rights" issue decided by the USSC, not necessarily a law. Rather than an amendment, I'd like to see Congress pass a law stripping courts of jurisdiction to rule on same-sex marriage cases.
There would be no difficulty in keeping the lower courts out of it, but constitutionally, I don't believe you can keep the USSC out of it based on Article III.