Creating legal tangles over a simple ruling

Supreme Court followers in Calif. believe the court will uphold the marriage ban, yet keep the 18,000 gay marriages intact (amendments are not by default retroactive). That kind of ruling makes sense in isolation -- the people did vote in a constitutional amendment and that amendment did not say anything about being retroactive. But out in the real world will create legal tangles. Calif. will have some gays who are married and other gays who can't get married. The big issue is how does this fare under the equal protection clause of either state or federal constitutions? There could be an appeal to the federal Supremes. But there are other issues. If DOMA is overturned to federally recognize marriages in Mass. what about those in Calif. who are married and get full federal rights and those who can't get marriage or those rights? What about those married in Massachusetts and move to Calif.? Does it count only if the marriage was done when it was legal in Calif.? Or should Calif. get out of the marriage business? If so do none of its residents qualify for federal benefits?