Here's what Clarence Thomas, who supported the majority decision, said in response to Justice Breyer's dissenting opion:
Contrary to the dissent’s arguments, resegregation is not occurring in Seattle or Louisville; these school boards have no present interest in remedying past segregation; and these race-based student-assignment programs do not serve any compelling state interest. Accordingly, the plans are unconstitutional. Disfavoring a color-blind interpretation of the Constitution, the dissent would give school boards a free hand to make decisions on the basis of race—an approach reminiscent of that advocated by the segregationists in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U. S 483 (1954). This approach is just as wrong today as it
was a half-century ago.
Let me help us parse this out. In the minds of 5 of our supreme court justices, including the one of African-American heritage, the same case and principles (ie., Brown vs. Board...) that made segreation unconstitutional also make INTEGRATION unconstitional.
That's right, folks: on Bizzaro world, segregation and integration am same thing!
Crikey, how I hate this decade.