One thing this underscores is that these folks play for keeps. In an early phase of the litigation which culminated in last Friday’s SCOTUS decision, a lesbian couple married in Canada moved to IA, in order to achieve minimal residency in order to file a divorce. Since IA did not allow gay marriage at that time, the trial courts reasoned that there was no gay divorce. Au contraire. They appealed it until they were successful in overturning IA’s gay marriage ban. The litigation strategy that the pro gay marriage forces backed was most impressive. And it got the job done for them. Something tells me that they are not going to give up - and this little matter is a perfect example of how they stage incidents that they know will get media attention. These folks are relentless.
The big mistake made by the anti-gay marriage folks was their failure to understand federalism, and thus to recognize that efforts to amend state Constitutions to prohibit gay marriage (as in Wisconsin in 2006) were waste of energy that should have been focused on amending the federal constitution. Too late now.
Last week, Texas had to hear a gay divorce.
Maybe so. However you need 3/4 of the states (38 states) to amend the constitution. Prior to the SC ruling at least 37 states allowed gay marriage and thus would not be likely to support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. So we are not anywhere close to the number needed.
The short lesson is that nothing SCOTUS says is credible. It changes like the wind.
You misunderstand federalism. Federalism actually give that right to the states, period. What you are describing is not federalism, and not a federal government - but tyranny.