“The reality is that there is going to be a national definition of marriage. The question for Congress is whether it will be the novel definition now being foisted upon us by the courts, or the one affirmed by the vast majority of the American people.” In the absence of an amendment, I agree that the courts will impose a national definition of marriage that includes same-sex marriage. But Gallagher has not shown that it is impossible for an amendment to block this nationalization. And if her political judgment is wrong, the question before her is this: Does she so desire a national definition of marriage that she is willing to fight a losing battle that lets the courts impose what she regards as the wrong one?