No, it was not "sloppy writing" on my part. Supreme Court cases prior to this one have ruled that special remedies like this MUST have a deadline to close out. In order to rely on those cases, Justice O'Connor was required to apply a sunset term to this remedy at Michigan Law School.
She gritted her teeth. She was ambiguous in her language. But that does not change the prior cases. A deadline must be there, and 25 years is the maximum deadline ever used. Those prior cases appear at the end of her Opinion in the Grutter case.
I thoroughly agree that this position makes no logical sense. It's saying, "This is unconstitutional, but not yet." It's like a jury in a criminal case coming in with the vrdict, "Not guilty, but don't do it again." But, as I said, it adds up to the end of affirmative action.
Billybob
Is it perfect? No. But it is good enough. In 25 years - using the worst-case scenarios, racial discrimination will end once and for all. Is it as soon as I would like? No, but I'll take it anyhow.
Sergey Gorshkov once said, "Perfect is the enemy of good enough."
I'll take good enough.