This is the name given to the opinion authored by Supreme Court justices who disagreed with the decision of the case.

The name given to the opinion authored by Supreme Court justices who disagree with the decision of the case is called a "dissenting opinion." When a case is heard in the Supreme Court, all the justices on the bench listen to the arguments, review the evidence and the lower court's decision, and then vote to come to a decision. The justice in the majority will often write the "majority opinion," explaining the court's decision and reasoning. In contrast, any justice who does not agree with the majority's decision has the right to write a dissenting opinion, which lays out their reasoning why they disagree with the majority.

Extra: The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States and its decisions have wide-ranging implications for American law and society. Justices on the Supreme Court aim to interpret the U.S. Constitution and other laws, and their diverse perspectives can lead to different interpretations and legal philosophies. This makes dissenting opinions important for a few reasons:

1. They provide a formal record of disagreement, showing that not all justices believed the majority reached the correct decision. 2. They can signal to lower courts, lawyers, and future cases a different line of thinking that might someday influence the development of the law. 3. They can also contribute to ongoing legal debates and sometimes form the basis for future challenges to existing laws and precedents, essentially creating a roadmap for how the law might evolve or be argued differently in the future. 4. Dissenting opinions can be an important tool for law students, scholars, and other justices, providing insights into different legal interpretations and arguments. 5. Historically, some dissenting opinions have become highly influential and are sometimes cited by later courts when the legal landscape shifts and the dissent's reasoning gains broader acceptance.