A US Supreme Court justice who disagrees with the majority opinion writes a dissenting opinion, explaining why he or she disagrees with the majority.
Offering a dissenting opinion.
dissenting.
No. If a Supreme Court justice disagrees with the decision and wants to make his or her opinion a matter of public and judicial record, the justice must write a dissenting opinion.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
dissenting opinion
No, a dissenting opinion is written when a justice disagrees with the majority opinion (which carries the force of law). If a justice is writing a dissenting opinion, that means he or she voted with the minority group, and wants to explain the reason why he or she disagrees with the official Opinion of the Court.Dissenting opinions may be cited, but are not enforceable.
dissenting.
A dissenting opinion is written when a justice disagrees with the majority opinion (which carries the force of law). If a justice is writing a dissenting opinion, that means he or she voted with the minority group, and wants to explain the reason why he or she disagrees with the official Opinion of the Court. Dissenting opinions may be cited, but are not enforceable.
When a Supreme Court "dissents" it is disagreeing with the majority opinion.
When a Supreme Court "dissents" it is disagreeing with the majority opinion.
A Supreme Court justice may choose to write a concurring opinion when he or she agrees with the majority decision, but wants to add perceptions or legal reasoning not addressed, or not addressed to that justice's satisfaction, in the majority opinion (opinion of the Court).
add points to the majority opinion
....disagrees with the majority opinion, and explains his legal rationale for doing so.
A concurring opinion