Such laws have a history of being overturned by activist judges. The views of the electorate and the actions of the legislature can, and have been all cast aside by sympathetic judges. This amendment was insurance against that.
As Sasaki said, it's likely just a matter of time before views shift enough to allow same sex marriage laws to be passed- as has already happened in New Hampshire. Pushing the issue in the courts has forced opponents to take steps to protect their views from judicial activism. As a result, in the states that have passed constitutional amendments it will be much more difficult to allow for it when/if opinion shifts.
Bookmarks