What is a dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court

The Vote in the Case

Variable Name
vote

Spaeth Name
HARV to BRYV

Normalizations
8 [ view ]

This variable provides information about each justice's vote in the case. It appears in the Justice Centered Datasets only. A regular concurrence is when the justice agrees with the Court's opinion as well as its disposition. A special concurence (i.e., a concurence in the judgment) is when the justice agrees with the Court's disposition but not its opinion. A jurisdictional dissent is when the justice disagrees with the Court's assertion or denial of jurisdiction. Such votes are counted as nonparticipations. Determination of how a given justice voted is by no means a simple matter of culling the Reports. The justices do not always make their options clear. Two problems, in particular, afflict efforts to specify votes: 1) whether the vote is a regular or a special concurrence, and 2) the treatment to be accorded a vote "concurring in part and dissenting in part." The first typically manifests itself when a justice joins the opinion of the Court "except for . . ." Because such exceptions typically tend to approach de minimis status, these are coded as regular concurrences. For example, Chief Justice Burger concurred in the opinion of the Court in New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. Carey, except for "footnote 6 thereof." 447 U.S. 54, at 71. Similarly, Blackmun's agreement with the Court in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, except for "that sentence thereof . . ." 447 U.S. 74, at 88. Where the Reports identify a justice as "concurring" or "concurring in part" said justice is treated as a member of the majority opinion coalition (i.e., as = 3), rather than a merely concurring in the result (i.e., as = 4). Whereas the preceding problem pertains to determining which type of concurrence a vote is, the problem with votes concurring and dissenting in part is whether they are special concurrences (= 4) or dissents (= 2). This matter was addressed previously in connection with the variable voteUnclear (vote not clearly specified). A vote concurring and dissenting in part is listed as a special concurrence if the justice(s) doing so does not disagree with the majority's disposition of the case. This may occur when: 1) the justice concurring and dissenting in part only voices disagreement with some or all of the majority's reasoning; 2) when said justice disapproves of the majority's deciding or refusing to decide additional issues involved in the case; or 3) when in a case in which dissent has been voiced, the justice(s) concurring and dissenting in part votes to dispose of the case in a manner more closely approximating that of the majority than that of the dissenter(s). In cases where determination of whether a vote concurring and dissenting in part is the former or the latter is not beyond cavil, an entry will appear in the voteUnclear variable of the affected case to allow users to make an independent judgment, if they are so minded. Note, however, that listing such votes as dissents (= 2) or special concurrences (= 4) has no effect on whether or not an opinion is written (the opinion variable). See also notes under the majority vote (majVote) variable.
Values:

1	voted with majority or plurality
2	dissent
3	regular concurrence
4	special concurrence
5	judgment of the Court
6	dissent from a denial or dismissal of certiorari , or dissent from summary affirmation of an appeal
7	jurisdictional dissent
8	justice participated in an equally divided vote

Introductory

Introduction
Citing to the SCDB

Identification Variables

Background Variables

Chronological Variables

Substantive Variables

Outcome Variables

Voting & Opinion Variables

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

A dissenting opinion is an opinion written by a justice who disagrees with the majority opinion. In the U.S. Supreme Court, any justice can write a dissenting opinion, and this can be signed by other justices. Judges have taken the opportunity to write dissenting opinions as a means to voice their concerns or express hope for the future.

The question is often asked why a judge or Supreme Court justice might want to write a dissenting opinion since, in effect, their side "lost." The fact is that dissenting opinions can be used in a number of key ways.

First of all, judges want to make sure that the reason why they disagreed with the majority opinion of a court case is recorded. Further, publishing a dissenting opinion can help make the writer of the majority opinion clarify their position. This is the example given by Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her lecture about dissenting opinions.

Secondly, a justice might write a dissenting opinion in order to affect future judgments in cases about situations similar to the case in question. In 1936, Chief Justice Charles Hughes stated that “A dissent in a Court of last resort is an appeal...to the intelligence of a future day...” In other words, a justice might feel that the decision goes against the rule of law and hopes that similar decisions in the future will be different based on arguments listed in their dissent. For example, only two people disagreed in the Dred Scott v. Sanford case that ruled that enslaved Black people should be viewed as property. Justice Benjamin Curtis wrote a forceful dissent about the travesty of this decision. Another famous example of this type of dissenting opinion occurred when Justice John M. Harlan dissented to the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruling, arguing against allowing racial segregation in the railway system.

A third reason why a justice might write a dissenting opinion is in the hope that, through their words, they can get Congress to push forward legislation to correct what they see as issues with the way the law is written. Ginsburg talks about such an example for which she wrote the dissenting opinion in 2007. The issue at hand was the time frame within which a woman had to bring a suit for pay discrimination based on gender. The law was written quite narrowly, stating that an individual had to bring suit within 180 days of the discrimination occurring. However, after the decision was handed down, Congress took up the challenge and changed the law so that this time frame was greatly extended.

Another type of opinion that can be delivered in addition to the majority opinion is a concurring opinion. In this type of opinion, a justice would agree with the majority vote but for different reasons than listed in the majority opinion. This type of opinion can sometimes be seen as a dissenting opinion in disguise.

Ginsburg, Hon. Ruth Bader. "The Role of Dissenting Opinions." Minnesota Law Review.

Sanders, Joe W. "The Role of Dissenting Opinions In Louisiana." Louisiana Law Review, Volume 23 Number 4, Digital Commons, June 1963.

This shows grade level based on the word's complexity.

(in appellate courts) an opinion filed by a judge who disagrees with the majority decision of a case.

WILL YOU SAIL OR STUMBLE ON THESE GRAMMAR QUESTIONS?

Smoothly step over to these common grammar mistakes that trip many people up. Good luck!

Fill in the blank: I can’t figure out _____ gave me this gift.

TAKE THE QUIZ TO FIND OUT

disseminule, dissension, dissent, dissenter, dissentient, dissenting opinion, dissentious, dissepiment, dissert, dissertate, dissertation

Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2022

When one or more judges on a panel disagree with a decision made by the majority in a court ruling, they can file an official disagreement known as a dissenting opinion.

In the United States and other jurisdictions, courts that decide appeals to the decisions of lower courts are called appellate courts (in the U.S., the Supreme Court is the top appellate court). In such courts, rulings are made by a panel of judges, with a majority vote deciding each case. Any judge who doesn’t vote with the majority can file a dissenting opinion (or simply dissent) explaining why they disagree.

In a general sense, a dissenting opinion is simply an opinion that does not agree with others—especially one that goes against a mainstream opinion. But the term is most often used in its specific legal sense. Dissenting opinions are part of the legal tradition in many countries, including the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Ireland. Dissenting opinions are very often discussed in relation to the U.S. Supreme Court, since such opinions can have a significant impact on future court rulings.

The infamous 1896 court case Plessy v. Ferguson is often regarded as one of the most prominent and yet flawed court cases in American history. In the case, the Supreme Court determined that “separate but equal” treatment of people of different races was allowed by the U.S. Constitution. Worse yet, this upholding of segregation was a landslide 7-to-1 decision.

The lone vote against maintaining the legality of institutional racism was Justice John Marshall Harlan. In his dissenting opinion, he wrote: “Our Constitution is color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.” Harlan’s dissent contributed to the eventual overturning of the “separate but equal” ruling 58 years later in another landmark case—Brown v. Board of Education (1954).

Dissenting opinions like Harlan’s are considered important because they put an alternative interpretation of the case on the record, which can encourage future discussion of the case. Such dissent may be used years later to shape arguments or opinions.

Dissenting opinions don’t always lead to the overturning of cases. But they at least allow the reasoning behind judges’ votes to be recorded and seen by the public. Along with the majority opinion and the dissenting opinion, another type of opinion is sometimes filed: a concurring opinion. A concurring opinion agrees with the prevailing opinion but bases its conclusion on different reasons or on a different view of the case.

During his tenure on the Supreme Court from 1804 to 1834, Justice William Johnson Jr. gained a reputation for being a frequent dissenter—he issued more than 30 dissenting opinions during that time!

From the lunchroom to the courtroom, dissenting opinions are a part of life, so it’s no wonder they’ve become an official part of the legal process.

4 charts explaining the dissenting opinion in the SCOTUS death-penalty ruling http://t.co/LXgWxFkkB2 pic.twitter.com/pVEZqcTzR4

— Bloomberg (@business) July 3, 2015

A dissenting opinion is not a personal attack, and it will not affect the quality of your life . Respect people’s opinion 💯

— TEEMARKFOODS (@IbeneroT) December 12, 2019

appellate
dissent
concurring opinion
majority
constitutional

True or false?

Every U.S. Supreme Court decision has a dissenting opinion.

Spin control began, Florida-style: the opinion only covers some counties, some people, some times.
In my opinion Lee was one of the greatest actors of all time.
We resolved to do our best to merit the good opinion which we thus supposed them to entertain of us.
Is the Bible revelation so clear and explicit that no difference of opinion as to its meaning is possible?
God and my Neighbour|Robert Blatchford
For the purpose of ascertaining the Board's powers in this connection the opinion of the Attorney General has been requested.
Readings in Money and Banking|Chester Arthur Phillips
But there is a pinnacle of human success and of human opinion, on which human foot was never yet permitted to rest.
The Pastor's Fire-side Vol. 3 of 4|Jane Porter
He was ordered, however, to keep the Emperor daily informed of the state of public opinion in Spain.
Napoleon's Marshals|R. P. Dunn-Pattison