Twice this term Justice Kennedy has started an opinion with the phrase “my join.” Here, the word join is used in SCOTUS lingo as a noun, rather than the conventional usage as a verb.
Davis v. Ayala (Concurring):
My join in the Court’s opinion is unqualified; for, in my view, it is complete and correct in all respects.
Rodriguez v. U.S. (Dissenting):
My join in Justice THOMAS’ dissenting opinion does not extend to Part III.
A quick search of WestLaw found only two other usages of this phrase.
Justice Stevens in Kansas v. Marsh:
Because Justice Blackmun did not read the plurality opinion as confronting the problem of equipoise that he believed Arizona law to present, my join of his dissent is consistent with my conclusion that stare decisis does not bind us today
Justice Thomas in Glickman v. Wileman Bros:
I join Justice SOUTER’s dissent, with the exception of Part II. My join is thus limited because I continue to disagree with the use of the Central Hudson balancing test and the discounted weight given to commercial speech generally.