>People focus more on their constitutional cases because those are the most impactful/famous, but a lot of their workload is just interpreting normal laws
They have proportionately more constitutional cases because a case hitting the SCOTUS needs to be re-appealed at least twice, and the SCOTUS needs to choose to accept the case (4 out of 9 of the judges to be precise). The SCOTUS only takes a few dozen cases a year, so whatever remains tends to be larger issues.
But yes, very few cases are going to be Brown vs. the Board of Education levels of impactful. Perusing some cases of 2023 reveal one such case "simply" being:
>A case in which the Court will decide whether the "serious drug offense" definition in the Armed Career Criminal Act incorporates the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense or the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the prior state drug offense.
Basically a bookkeeping case due to the different states as of late re-defining "serious drugs"