Final answer:
The subject question involves U.S. Supreme Court justices concurring in part and dissenting in opinions and highlights the significance of such opinions in legal history and future jurisprudence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The topic in question relates to the practice of justices of the U.S. Supreme Court writing concurring and dissenting opinions to express their individual views on cases. Justices concur when they agree with the majority's decision but for different reasons, whereas they dissent when they disagree with the majority's reasoning or conclusion. These opinions can be influential in shaping future legal interpretations and provide insight into the justices' reasoning.
Historical examples include Justice John Marshall Harlan's dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, which upheld Louisiana's segregation law. Decades later, in the Brown v. Board of Education decision, the Court unanimously overturned "separate but equal", despite the tradition of de facto segregation in the United States. The dissents can be powerful as they can be used in later cases as reasons to overturn precedent, exemplified by responses to Brown and the desegregation movement.