It was also the intent of the founders that everyman be able to understand and incorporate the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, all other "law" subordinate to it. They were very wise in this, and it worked very well for some 150 or so years.
We the People are the final arbiters of what is good law, to be obeyed, and what is bad law to be villified, ignored and ultimately repealed. The manner of action by the citizen(s) was also left to the people, and the founders guaranteed it by incorporating the 2nd amendment into the Bill of Rights as the ultimate solution.
I don't need, nor do most literate people need 9 black robed, fed for life, lawyers to "intrepret" the plain English of the Constitution. The Constituion is a given benchmark, not to be altered except by the method provided in that document. The USSC should be "intrepreting" the case before them as to it's ability to follow the Constitution, not the other way around.
In any event, the USSC it'self gave us the decision in Marbury vs Madison in which they declared that all "law" repugnant to the Constitution was void and of no effect.
In addition, who are they to decide what is a "compelling interest" of the govt as regards "diversity". This is pure social engineering from the bench, an area where they have absolutely no authority, and little wisdom. The social good of the country is to be decided by the legislature, with the input of the citizens, and if conflict with existing law arises it is the job of the USSC to settle such legislative questions by applying the tenents of the Constitution strictly, and without bias or prejudice.
I don't know about you, but I am not willing to turn over my rights and priveledges to 9 people just because they say so.
These folks should look at their recent history to see what fate may await them if this doesn't stop.