> That reasoning tells that a law (the "criminal law") beats the Constitution by putting restrictions on a Constitutional right.
There's a lot to parse in your post, but I would strongly suggest reading J.S. Mill's On Liberty[1]. In it, Mill describes (what is now known) as the Harm Principle[2]. This (or something like this), and not necessarily criminal law, is essentially what the Constitution is beholden to. It just so happens that most crimes also violate ethical principles.
There's a lot to parse in your post, but I would strongly suggest reading J.S. Mill's On Liberty[1]. In it, Mill describes (what is now known) as the Harm Principle[2]. This (or something like this), and not necessarily criminal law, is essentially what the Constitution is beholden to. It just so happens that most crimes also violate ethical principles.
[1] https://www.gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm
[2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill-moral-political/#Har...