I have noticed that even really good lawyers for conservatives can argue a case from the perspective of the homoFascists. This is a loosing strategy. They should undo the false narrative of the enemy and put to rights the real nature of the issue.
The marriage debate is no different. Attorneys try to argue for the "right for children to have a mother and father," but that's not the central issue at all, although enormously important. That issue springs from the ontology of marriage, what it IS in its substance.
The case transcripts are available for your review.
I haven’t seen any summaries suggesting ineffective representation.