The court, in a unanimous ruling, said the constitution does not bar citizen initiatives from making prospective changes to the constitution, even if that effectively overrules the effect of a prior court decision, because that change would not be a reversal.
The court is, was and never will be entitled to create law. The Constitution as it stands is limited to marriage between a man and a woman. The Massachusetts Legislature didn't perform the necessary action to make homosexual marriage the law of the land.
Women couldn't vote.
The Constitution needed to be "amended" to provide the mechanism to make women voting legal.
No such amendment exists.
I don't understand why we cannot bring this before the highest court in the land and ask whether Massachusetts is validly giving out marriage licenses to homosexuals.