Despite what you’ll hear from either the libs or the conservatives, the case is about the constitutional right of the people amending their own constitution.  It was not about gay marriage.

The court decision to uphold the initiative is the correct one.  The court, ruling 6-1, said:

In a sense, petitioners’ and the attorney general’s complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California Constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it.

This brings integrety to the constitution.  It means that any measure approved by the people would be amended as voted.

Consider the opposite: let’s say that the court ruled that the constition cannot be ammended by the people.  Prop 8 is void.  So what if the LGBT community wanted to pass an amendment saying that marriage is for anyone and everyone?  Because the court ruled that amendments by the people must first be approved by the court, people can say that amendment isn’t really the will of the people, fosters racism, insensitivity, etc.

This was a good decision not because it protects marriage, but because it protects the constitution of California.