I mean, yeah, that tracks: for a majority that's already hell-bent on bending over backwards to overturn Roe/Casey & resurrect nondelegation, finding grounds to overturn Grutter so that they get to speed up its approximately-25-year sunset clause on affirmative action that swing-vote O'Connor informally advocated for in dicta are frankly the easiest of their concerns.
This is a very one-sided issue in polling, and increasingly so with time. Ending affirmative action is basically the conservative version of gay marriage in the 2010's. There's nothing to lose here. An affirmative action ballot measure just failed overwhelmingly in California. Public opinion is clearly on their side.Not to mention, just because
SFFA v. Harvard & UNC mean the end of
Bakke &
Grutter as good law, they don't mean that the war fought over affirmative action will end anytime soon: colleges will inevitably devise new admissions process methods that'll inevitably be subject to litigation of some sort, as they've already begun doing by decreasing the importance of standardized testing & making GPA reporting & essays optional. Said revised methods will make it harder for such plaintiffs as SFFA to prove discrimination, which is perhaps the foresight-based intent of the revised methods.
