In the 1925 case of Alejandrino v. Quezon et al., Senator Jose Alejandrino was suspended by the Philippine Senate for assaulting another senator and using unparliamentary language. He filed a petition to challenge his suspension, arguing that it violated his rights as an elected official and exceeded the Senate's constitutional authority. The U.S Supreme Court ruled against him, stating that legislative bodies have inherent power to maintain order within their proceedings, including suspending members who engage in disorderly behavior. This decision upheld the principle of separation of powers between different branches of government - affirming that courts should not interfere with internal disciplinary actions taken by legislative bodies unless there is a clear violation of individual rights or constitutional provisions.

The dissenting opinion in the Alejandrino v. Quezon case argued that the Philippine Senate did not have the authority to suspend Senator Jose Alejandrino for disorderly behavior and language without a two-thirds vote, as required by their own rules. The justice believed that this action was an infringement on Alejandrino's constitutional rights, particularly his right to free speech. They also contended that it was inappropriate for the Supreme Court of Philippines to refuse jurisdiction over this matter, arguing instead that they should intervene in order to uphold constitutional law and protect individual liberties against potential abuses of power by other branches of government.