We have to remember that Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which explicitly legalized homosexual marriage, by statute law.
So even if the Supreme Court reversed itself, to rule that there is not some constitutional right to same sex marriage, that law is still there.
The Supreme Court ruled as they did, at a time when federal law banned homosexual marriage.
Legally, it’s not going to be that simple for the Supreme Court to overturn a previous ruling and then say that homosexual marriage is illegal again.
While there's no way that the USSC will overturn it on Constitutional grounds (Obergfell v. Hodges), the FACT is that the Constitution does NOT, in any way, endorse sodomite behavior.
Likewise, the Congress passing the "SAFE" act would be found Un-Constitutional, as a result, and ALL the nonsense about sex deviates having some kind of "Rights", which no one else has, is contrary to the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause, for NORMAL citizens.
Just as baby-killing was left to the States, so should the rump rangers and dykes activities be decided.
Red states=decency, Blue states=depravity.....that's "America" today.
Congress has no authority to do such a thing. When you get married, your marriage certificate is signed, sealed and filed in accordance with the laws of the STATE where you are married.
All Congress can do is establish a legal standard for “marriage” as it applies to things like federal tax law.
This is where that Judge Bunning was exposed as a dupe and a fraud. If “same-sex” marriage was so important to him in the Kimberly Davis case, he should have just signed the marriage certificate himself. But he knew damn well he could not do that, because a federal judge has no authority to sign a Kentucky marriage certificate. This is why the case never should have been in his courtroom in the first place.