I don’t see that ruling begin undone. Sorry, but the courts have failed us in this debate...and no one took the threat seriously until it was too late. We have to salvage what we can. The government does not need to define marriage, only legal rights for property. At some point in our history, we allowed government to steal the term marriage from the religious bond and make it a status with the state. That has not turned out well.
We didn’t let the government steal marriage, this is America, Thomas Jefferson bought a marriage license for his marriage, so did Washington buy one for his favorite nephew.
Marriage licenses became mandatory in 1639, in Massachusetts.
From THE COLONIAL FAMILY IN AMERICA While we think of the early New England settlers as very religious, they actually viewed marriage as a civil contract, not a religious contract. Consequently, marriage was a function of the magistrates more than the clergy.
From LEGISLATIVE GUIDE TO MARRIAGE LAW Iowa.gov They (Puritans founders of Massachusetts) believed that marriage was not a religious ceremony but a civil contract. They required that this covenant must be agreed or executed (not performed or solemnized) before a magistrate, and not a minister. They also insisted that if the terms of the marriage covenant were broken, then the union could be ended by divorce. These attitudes became the basis of regional marriage customs throughout New England.