What's So Supreme About It?

The Supreme Court today essentially decided that school integration is unconstitutional.

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.