How to Read a Dissenting Opinion (Especially if You're a 1L)

Justice Sotomayor's blistering dissent in DHS v. D.V.D. (June 2025) is a masterclass in judicial disagreement. It's passionate, precise, and powerful—calling out what she described as "a gross abuse of the Court's equitable discretion" and warning that the majority's actions expose "thousands to the risk of torture or death."

In that case, the Supreme Court's conservative majority sided with the Trump administration's emergency request to resume third-country deportations—including to countries like South Sudan and Libya—without meaningful notice to the migrants or an opportunity to raise a claim under the Convention Against Torture. The administration had already defied lower court orders halting these removals, and Sotomayor made clear in her dissent that the Court was not just tolerating but enabling executive lawlessness.

Her dissent, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, wasn’t just about this case. It was a searing reminder of what’s at stake when the rule of law is disregarded—and why dissenting opinions, even when they lose, matter.

For 1Ls just beginning their legal education, dissents might feel confusing or secondary. But they’re actually a powerful tool for learning how law works—and how it evolves. Here's how to make the most of them.

What Is a Dissenting Opinion?

Before diving into how to read one, it's important to understand what a dissenting opinion actually is—and what role it plays in a case. Think of it as an official record of disagreement, one that keeps the legal conversation going even after a case is decided.

A dissent is written by a judge who disagrees with the majority’s decision. It doesn’t create binding precedent. It doesn’t change the outcome of the case. But it does offer a glimpse into:

👀 Alternative interpretations of law,

👀 Competing constitutional values, and

👀 How today's dissent might become tomorrow's law.

For example, in DHS v. D.V.D., Justice Sotomayor’s dissent provided a clear alternative reading of the immigration statutes at issue, underscored the importance of due process rights, and raised serious questions about judicial complicity in executive overreach.

Some of the most influential legal arguments in American history started as dissents. And reading them well is a key skill for any future lawyer.

Why You Should Read the Dissent

You might be wondering: if the dissent didn’t “win,” why spend time reading it at all? Great question—and one every law student should ask. Dissents aren’t just academic grumbling. They sharpen your thinking, clarify the majority, and sometimes change history.

✅ To Sharpen Your Critical Thinking: Dissents force you to ask: Is there more than one reasonable way to interpret this rule? (Spoiler: yes.)

✅ To Clarify the Majority’s Reasoning: Oddly enough, the dissent can help clarify what the majority decided—by critiquing it point by point.

✅ To See the Law in Motion: The law isn’t static. Today’s dissent might reflect tomorrow’s doctrine—or sound the alarm when it's under threat. Justice Sotomayor’s dissent in DHS v. D.V.D. warns that overlooking executive noncompliance doesn’t just affect one case—it risks long-term damage to the rule of law.

How to Read a Dissent: Step-by-Step

Once you understand the value of dissents, the next step is knowing how to approach them. Here’s a structured way to read and analyze dissenting opinions so you can extract the most meaning—without getting overwhelmed.

1️⃣ Start with the Majority.

Get clear on the holding, the rule, and how the majority applied it. If you're using IRAC or CREAC to brief the case, do that first.

2️⃣ Identify the Author and Tone.

Who is dissenting? Is this judge known for a particular philosophy or writing style? Is the tone logical, sarcastic, passionate? Tone can signal the purpose behind the dissent. In DHS v. D.V.D., for instance, Sotomayor’s tone was urgent and outraged, signaling her deep concern that the Court’s majority was enabling executive lawlessness and undermining judicial authority.

3️⃣ Pinpoint the Disagreement.

Does the dissent take issue with: The rule itself? How the rule was applied? A matter of policy or justice?

Zero in on what the dissent is pushing back against.

4️⃣ Watch for Competing Values.

Dissents often reveal a tug-of-war between important legal interests: liberty vs. security, individual rights vs. governmental power, federal vs. state authority.

5️⃣ Reconstruct the “Dissenting Rule.”

What rule would the dissent establish if it had the votes? Write it out in your own words. This helps you understand the full legal landscape.

6️⃣ Take a Position.

You’re allowed to have opinions. Do you agree with the dissent? Why or why not? Which reasoning makes more sense to you?

Final Thought: Dissent Isn’t Defeat

Now that you’ve seen how and why to read a dissenting opinion, here’s the big-picture takeaway: disagreement isn't a detour from legal reasoning. Rather, it's part of the path.

Dissenting doesn’t mean being wrong. It means being willing to speak up, to offer a different lens, and to challenge the status quo. In law school—and in the legal world—those voices matter.

So the next time you come across a dissent, don’t treat it as an afterthought. Read it. Wrestle with it. You might just find your own voice in the process.