Former Michigan Solicitor General Eric Restuccia (now assistant solicitor general) and his colleague Aaron Lindstrom participated in SCOTUSblog's special coverage of the same-sex marriage decisions, United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry, with a piece on "Federalism and the authority of the states to define marriage." They note that Windsor’s analysis about how DOMA harmed same-sex couples and their children "may be cited by those who seek to challenge the laws of states [such as Michigan] that have adopted the traditional definition of marriage:
The harms about which Justice Kennedy speculates were predicated on DOMA fracturing a state’s marriage law into two tiers, with same-sex marriage relegated to a secondary status. Yet, where a state maintains its traditional definition, these considerations are no longer applicable. Moreover, any assertions that the same arguments remain relevant even where a state maintains its traditional definition of marriage would also support other competing family arrangements, including plural marriage (more than forty countries currently permit it). The Windsor majority did not discuss whether the state must accept models competing with traditional marriage like “consent-based” marriage, as discussed by Justice Alito in his dissent. Further, the Court’s analysis looks to the states as the place where the consensus on such questions is drawn. The analysis in Windsor, therefore, supports the authority of the states.