What is a concurring opinion?

• A. A justice writing the majority opinion with the same reasoning
• B. A justice agreeing with the outcome but offering different reasoning
• C. A dissenting view that disagrees with outcome
• D. A neutral summary of decisions

Answer: (B)

A concurring opinion is written by a justice who agrees with the court’s final ruling but wants to explain different reasoning or emphasize a different legal point. It shows that while the outcome is shared, the path to that result isn’t exactly the same as the majority’s reasoning. This helps readers see alternative grounds the court could rely on or signals how the justice might approach related cases in the future.

Why this fits: the key idea is agreement on the outcome paired with separate reasoning. The other descriptions describe a majority opinion, a dissent, or a neutral summary, none of which capture the idea of agreeing with the result but adding a separate justification.