How do judicial reviews in the dissent differ from those in the majority opinion

The correct answer is A) The dissent uses the majority opinion as evidence.

The dissent uses the majority opinion as evidence in a judicial review.

When one or more judges express disagreement with the majority opinion of the members of the court, it is said that they are dissenting. A dissent is an opinion in a legal case when judges disagree and there are others –the majority- that agrees.  Dissenting opinions can be cited in other cases when a change in the law is needed. The dissent uses the majority opinion as evidence of its case. The judges could disagree because there is a different interpretation of a law or the facts and different application principles.

The other options of the question were b) the dissent uses causes with similar conclusions as support, c) the dissent uses the decisions of lower courts as evidence, and d) the dissent uses summaries written by the court justices as support.

well the lessons we can learn is how quickly our fragile freedoms can be overcome. mccarthy rose to power in 1950 of a tsunami of anti-communist hysteria, brandishing a lost of "known communists" in the state department, and held public trials to enhance his political clout. he had fallen from power but only when his attacks were against the u.s. army broadcast to millions of americans to their homes exposing his indecent persecution of the innocence of people. the senate censured him in december 1954 disgraced and discredited, he had died three years later at the age of 47..i hope my answer has you.. good day to you..