a Supreme Court opinion begins with..
SOTOMAYOR, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II–A, II–B, and IV, in which SCALIA, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, and KAGAN, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Parts II–C and III, in which SCALIA, GINSBURG, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in part. ROBERTS, C.J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which BREYER and ALITO, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
But in this instance, it really means Kennedy joined all of the opinion except two sections (II-C and III, in case you are wondering) he thought un-necessary, and which did not add to the ruling.
If you are curious, this is from Missouri v McNeely, the Court’s case this week that says the dissipation of alcohol from the bloodstream does not by itself create an “exigent circumstance” (or emergency) justifying a warrantless blood draw after a DUI. But it might, if in the totality of the circumstances, the officer can demonstrate the need for the blood test. Yet, the Court won’t specify what such circumstances might look like.