People who don't drive want denser cities where things are closer together; but sprawled out cities are all but imposed by car centered development -- highways, parking spaces, etc.
They kind of have that already in malls - which are usually serviced by public transit. I think there's a balance always to be had to not have cities turn into hell scapes in either direction. Cars are in many places essential to avoid being a victim of street crime in this day and age.
Malls are an imperfect substitute for urbanism. Malls have closing hours, streets don't. Malls are usually surrounded by moats of parking so that drivers get priority and pedestrians / transit riders have walk a long and dangerous way into the mall. Malls can kick you out for loitering or if they don't like how you look.
It is true that some people use suburban malls as urban replacements. Teenagers use it for hanging out with friends, seniors use it for walking, and some sit and daydream. But the mall is not a real replacement for urbanism.
Yes, it is not the same thing, but you could also voice the same complaints against city centers without car access. Most urban malls I've seen have access from the sidewalk and parking underground.
> Malls can kick you out for loitering or if they don't like how you look.
That is probably a huge advantage in most people's eyes.
