There is a filibuster at the Federal level that prevents a majority of elected officials from passing laws. The electoral college can prevent the candidate with the most votes from being elected. These are both tools that allow a minority to block what a majority of voters want. Three of the SC justices were appointed during a president's term who did not win the popular vote.
At the state level there is no filibuster meaning that a dissenting minority has no way to protect themselves. Re-districting (gerrymandering) also neuters the voting power of minority groups.
There is a bias for majority rule at the state level, and minority rule at the federal level. So yes, it's minority views. This is why issues like Slavery and segregation were argued as "states rights". The way conservatives prefer our government to be set up is with a weak federal government and strong state governments so that a localized majority can enforce moral legislation on a disenfranchised minority without Federal intervention. It has always been about power and any arguments about "returning the decision to the people" is no different that someone in 1964 saying it should be up to the states whether or not minorities can use the same bathroom as white people.