More on the Gang of 5

Last Thursday the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed down yet another high-profile, 5-4 split decision. You know the split: Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy -- Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens.

Another conservative victory.

The case, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, was brought about because of Seattle's policy of busing students to a public school not of their choice, based purely on race.

You see, Seattle elites have the noble task of ensuring all public high schools meet diversity quotas. If they don't -- well, Caucasians from a "white-heavy" school must be bused elsewhere.

The SCOTUS correctly noted that such a practice is nothing short of racism.

As the Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

Of course, this is all just too much for the New York Times. In this editorial, the author bemoans, "the court’s radical new majority turned its back on that proud tradition [of Brown v. Board of Education]."

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Supreme Court has not retreated one inch from the Brown decision. But don't take my word for it. Read the concurring opinion (page 49) written by the only racial minority on the Court, Justice Clarence Thomas.

In it, Thomas makes some fantastic points, including these:

"Every time the government uses racial criteria to ‘bring the races together,’ someone gets excluded, and the person excluded suffers an injury solely because of his or her race."

"It is the height of arrogance for Members of this Court to assert blindly that their motives are better than others."

"Indeed, if our history has taught us anything, it has taught us to beware of elites bearing racial theories."

But my personal favorite is this one, referring to the dissent of Justice Breyer:

"Justice Breyer’s good intentions, which I do not doubt, have the shelf life of Justice Breyer’s tenure"