Legislators intentionally enact laws that they know are contrary to Supreme Court precedent so that, once said law is struck down by the lower courts, someone can file a petition for certiorari in the hopes that the Supreme Court will take up the case and reverse the earlier precedent. There is nothing inherently illegitimate in that. Now, if those in a given state think that their legislators are wasting their time, or wasting the state's money, or whatnot, in enacting legislation that is doomed to fail in the lower courts, causing the state to incur legal expenses and so on, in the (likely forlorn) pursuit of a landmark Supreme Court reversal, then the people of that state can vote themselves new legislators next time around.
Moreover, you throw around the word "crime" rather loosely here.
I suggest you learn more about the Separation of Powers doctrine under the Constitution. You may disagree, and strenuously, with how things are going in terms of policy, in this jurisdiction or that, but what you are proposing is, to my mind, profoundly undemocratic.
Plessy v. Ferguson was once Supreme Court precedent as well.
= new reply since forum marked as read
