The early 20th century progressives decided that they didn’t like the constitutional limits on government so they decided to change it.

One thing they did was to change the way the Supreme Court works.

Previously, when the SCOTUS would consider constitutional challenges, they would look not only to the actual wording of the Constitution, but also the background writings of the Founders to understand their intent. The court decision would then be based on what they learned from that research.
The socialist progressives realized that their agenda could never be realized as long as the SCOTUS depended on the wisdom of the Founders for their decision - that had to be changed.

They began characterizing the Founders as a group of senile old men whose creation represented only their time and grievances against the King of England. They coined the expression “a living document” with the intent of changing the Constitution to suit their wishes. The foundation of our country would be destroyed.

The new SCOTUS, instead of depending on constitutional writings, would now depend on “precedent” for their decisions. The folly in this is that it allowed a judge to interpret the Constitution in a way that he thought it should be, rather than the way it is. A decision based on this perverse thinking then becomes a precedent for the next decision which again distorts the intent of the Founders.

At the same time, they made the same changes in the universities and law schools. Rather than teach the Constitution and the thought processes behind it, they began teaching prior legal decisions which had little basis in the Constitution. All of those law books you see behind lawyers on TV are just full of such ill-begotten decisions.

By the mid-20th century, court decisions had become so corrupted from being based on prior distorted decisions that we now get court rulings that are in direct opposition to the Constitution. It then became accepted that any court ruling on a single case would become law across the country for all to respect and obey, regardless of the fact that lawmaking is the job of Congress, not the courts.

Court rulings must be made to apply only to the specific case at hand and the use of precedence must be abolished. Each case must be judged on its own merits and how they apply to the Constitution, not to previous cases. This is the problem we see in the courts today.

The Marxist progressives, over time, have succeeded in reducing the Constitution to little more than a fairy tale of dreamers long gone. Had the concepts inscribed in the Constitution been respected and obeyed by those in Congress, the White House, and the courts, we wouldn’t have 535 people today making a full time job of doing nothing but dreaming up new laws to limit our freedom and liberty.