This afternoon, I surfed around on the Supreme Court's web site, hoping that they might have handed down some juicy decision I might read and argue about. I didn't find any. Instead, I did find a strange phrase I can't figure out. In Hemi Group vs. City of New York
), it says that "CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court in part".
I understand that Supreme Court justices can write opinions concurring in part, concurring in judgment in part, or dissenting in part. But I don't get how they can deliver the opinion of the Court in part. What happened to the rest of the court's opinion? Although there are concurring and dissenting opinions in this case, there are none who "delivered the other part of the Court's opinion". There also is no explanation that "the dog ate the opinion of the Court in part". So how does this make sense?