You’re missing the point. The constitution is given a lofty status above everything. The obvious example of where this is manifest is in gun control. The anti-gun-control advocates argue that there is a constitutional right to have assault weapons. The gun-control advocates now spend their efforts on arguing on constitutional grounds what was actually meant when the constitution was written, as though that’s relevant to the discussion.
It’s used just as much to enforce a bad status quo as a good one. It’s not clear to me that this is demonstrably better than having a rapid turnover of laws in the hope that the general tendency is towards improvement (which I would argue, despite recent notable set backs in a few areas, is the case in the UK).
It may be cultural (or lack of cultural understanding) as well as disproportionate reporting of problems, but I have a much greater fear of stepping out of line when I’m in the US than I ever do in the UK.
