There is little more in the legal literature on the subject of dissent than, on the one hand, the feeling that somehow it helps to present more than one side of a question and, on the other, that dissent is confusing and unsettling, and, therefore to be avoided. The part that dissent has played in preventing "history" from becoming the routine repetition of events, the function it fulfills in saving mankind from a mechanical adherence to an authoritarian concept of society, the psychodynamic need of the individual for self-expression-particularly evident in democratic societies-these and other related approaches have had not only inadequate treatment but hardly any consideration at all on the part of those who write about laws and law-making.
A. J. Levin,
MR. JUSTICE WILLIAM JOHNSON, JURIST IN LIMINE: DISSENT AND THE JUDGING FACULTY,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol47/iss4/3