What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify whether the court opinion mentions that one or more of the members of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed dissented. Focus on whether there exists any statement to this effect in the opinion, for example "divided," "dissented," "disagreed," "split.". A reference, without more, to the "majority" or "plurality" does not necessarily evidence dissent (the other judges may have concurred). If a case arose on habeas corpus, indicate dissent if either the last federal court or the last state court to review the case contained one. If the highest court with jurisdiction to hear the case declines to do so by a divided vote, indicate dissent. If the lower court denies an en banc petition by a divided vote and the Supreme Court discusses same, indicate dissent.

Opinion:
REAGAN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. v. ABOUREZK et al.
No. 86-656.
Argued October 5, 1987
Decided October 19, 1987
Deputy Solicitor General Wallace argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Fried, Assistant Attorney General Willard, Roger Clegg, Michael Jay Singer, and Abraham D. Sofaer.
Steven R. Shapiro argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Arthur N. Eisenberg, John A. Powell, Charles S. Sims, Peter L. Zimroth, Michael D. Young, and Leonard Boudin
Daniel J. Popeo and Paul D. Kamenar filed a brief for the Washington Legal Foundation et al. as amici curiae urging reversal.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the American Bar Association by Eugene C. Thomas, William A. Bradford, Jr., and David W. Burgett; for the Committee on Immigration and Nationality Law of the New York City Bar Association et al. by Robert M. Kaufman, Carl R. Baldwin, and Steven M. Freeman; for the International Human Rights Law Group by Eli Whitney Debevoise II and Kimberly Till; and for the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights et al. by Arthur C. Helton.
Ann H. Franke and Jacqueline W. Mintz filed a brief for the American Association of University Professors et al. as amici curiae.
Per Curiam.
The judgment below is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice Blackmun took no part in the decision of this case. Justice Scalia took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Question: Does the court opinion mention that one or more of the members of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed dissented?

Choices:
Yes
No

Answer: 1