Risa Goluboff writes :

Stevens and Breyer are right. The offense they have taken at Roberts’ and Thomas’ treatment of Brown is entirely appropriate. The plurality and concurring opinions undermine and misinterpret decades of efforts to undo the long American history of racial segregation, discrimination, and inequality.

Except that pretty much the rest of Goluboff’s article is devoted to showing that the interpretation of Brown given by Roberts and Thomas is entirely reasonable, Brown itself having been insufficiently egalitarian for the author’s taste. You can make either argument–Roberts and Thomas as betrayers of Brown, Brown as insufficient–but to make both at the same time would require skills that Goluboff evidently does not have, and that Slate’s editors are unwilling to demand before publishing an attack on the conservative justices.