My guess is that it's because it was a per curiam decision, meaning the majority felt that it didn't need a lot of elaboration. The reason for that is probably

My guess is that it's because it was a per curiam decision, meaning the majority felt that it didn't need a lot of elaboration. The reason for that is probably that given McGirt v. Oklahoma, Sharp v. Muphy was an obvious ruling. In other words, Roberts and Kavanaugh disagreed with McGirt, but once McGirt was precedent, Sharp followed immediately. Thomas is known for thinking precedent doesn't matter and should therefore be (mostly) ignored, so his dissent is not surprising to me, though I didn't read it. Likewise, I didn't read Alito's, so I don't know what his reasoning was.