America's national government is divided into three branches, of which in theory there are checks and balances of each branch so that no one branch is all powerful, but these are just words on paper, and then there are the actual actions of these branches in reality. The Supreme Court or the defenders of an activist Supreme Court have done a wonderful job of basically convincing the American people that the Supreme Court has the Constitutional right to not just interpret law and thereby be limited in what it does and accomplishes, but to actually make new law, sometimes profound and national new law which supersedes the legislative branch as well as the will of the people, along with make the executive branch essentially of no import, except for the fact that the executive branch is the branch that nominates Supreme Court justices, indicating, that because we have two major parties, that the Supreme Court, consists of men and women that have specific party leanings which most definitely affects the ideological decisions that they make.
There are many Supreme Court decisions that have shook the very foundation of Constitutional government, of which, fundamentally the reason that these decisions have such import, is that they wrest away from the States their own specific laws and their own specific precedents, so that the new law of the land is national and not governed by local or State policies. For instance, in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S, ruled in 2015, took what had been a State rights' issue of same-sex couples and the right of marriage, and made it instead a national issue, that overnight stipulated in every State of this Union that same-sex marriages were the law of the land, guaranteed by the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision, effectively stipulated that when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in1868, that somehow it applied to same-sex marriages, which inexplicably had been overlooked by our counterparts in the 19th century.
Another profound decision which once again interfered with State rights was the Roe v. Wade (1973) decision, which ruled that States that restricted or banned abortions were in violation of a woman's right to privacy in which the Supreme Court basically made up their own rules about how privacy and abortion were to be treated on a national scale.
The Supreme Court has also weighed in on draft dodgers and conscientious objection, as in the Muhammad Ali case; the Bush v. Gore Presidential election recount, decided essentially on party ideological grounds, and the legality of separate public schools, based on race in Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka, and so on and so forth, of which, some of the decisions are brilliant, some are not, but many of them are overreaching, overbearing, and infringe upon the legislative and executive branches, and most disturbingly, infringe upon the voice of the people, as if these Supreme Court justices, are a law and a wisdom unto themselves, which essentially is exactly what they are in impact.
Again and again, the mass media, blithely goes along and even encourages the Supreme Court to act the way that it does, never seeming to realize that if one branch can be not only the boss of its own house, but can boss the legislative and executive branches, making this Supreme Court, effectively the final say of their activist interpretation of a "living Constitution" than this government is not a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, but instead has devolved into a clique of nine special men and women of which if five of them wish the law to be one way, and four do not, than the five will make that new law, that will be imposed upon the people, for better or for worse, in which, that Constitution, is treated not as the law of the land, but as a document that can be made to say whatever those five wish it to say.