or Voting Rights Act were racist. Of course, the Court overturned aspects of the VRA because, you know, they pronounced that racism doesn't exist anymore. Not only did they overrule their own precedents, but they also legislated from the bench w/r/t the VRA.

Stare decisis isn't suicide pact (could you be any more overly dramatic?). It is to avoid wild swings and chaos in the judicial process and it is to avoid having to rule continually on a similar aspect of law or the Constitution. When rulings have been overturned in the past, and that is on rare occasion, it has almost always been to expand rights rather than to restrict them. I'd love to know whose ox the Court "thinks" is being gored here (the Supreme Court doesn't have a "mind" as you put it) and why they think an overrule of Bakke is warranted. Come to think of it, do you even know what Bakke ruled? My bet is no.

This suicide pact argument you're making is flawed and invalid. What you're applauding is that the Court is made up of black-robed politicians rather than thoughtful jurists. Par for the course in your Trumpist vision for the United States.