In Supreme Court practice, when a justice agrees with the majority's outcome but writes separately to explain different reasoning, this is called a(n) ______.

In Supreme Court practice, when a justice agrees with the majority's outcome but writes separately to explain different reasoning, this is called a(n) ______.

• A. Dissenting
• B. Concurring
• C. Opinion of the Court
• D. Per curiam

Answer: (B)

A concurring opinion is used when a justice agrees with the outcome of the majority but writes separately to explain different reasoning. This lets the justice join the decision while offering an alternative or additional justification that may reflect a different legal approach or emphasis. It helps clarify how the ruling should be understood or applied in related contexts, without overturning the majority’s result. Dissenting would mean disagreeing with the outcome and offering reasons to oppose it. The Opinion of the Court is the official majority opinion expressing the Court’s joined reasoning. A per curiam opinion is an unsigned Court-issued decision, usually reflecting the Court’s collective ruling rather than an individual justice’s separate rationale.

A concurring opinion is used when a justice agrees with the outcome of the majority but writes separately to explain different reasoning. This lets the justice join the decision while offering an alternative or additional justification that may reflect a different legal approach or emphasis. It helps clarify how the ruling should be understood or applied in related contexts, without overturning the majority’s result.

Dissenting would mean disagreeing with the outcome and offering reasons to oppose it. The Opinion of the Court is the official majority opinion expressing the Court’s joined reasoning. A per curiam opinion is an unsigned Court-issued decision, usually reflecting the Court’s collective ruling rather than an individual justice’s separate rationale.