In the 1953 case of Barsky v. Board of Regents, Dr. Robert Barsky challenged the revocation of his medical license by the New York State Board of Regents on grounds that he had refused to testify before a Congressional committee investigating alleged Communist activities in professional groups. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, ruling that it was within a state's rights to revoke a professional license if an individual failed to cooperate with such investigations. The court found no violation of due process or free speech rights as claimed by Dr. Barsky and emphasized that licensed professionals have obligations beyond those applicable to ordinary citizens which may include cooperation with governmental inquiries related to their profession.

In the dissenting opinion for Barsky v. Board of Regents, Justice Black argued that Dr. Barsky's constitutional rights were violated when he was denied a hearing before his medical license was revoked by the New York State Board of Regents. He contended that due process requires an opportunity to be heard and present evidence in one's defense before being deprived of any significant property interest, such as a professional license. Furthermore, Justice Black criticized the majority for upholding a punishment based on charges not included in the original complaint against Dr. Barsky - namely his refusal to testify before congressional committees - which he believed constituted an unfair surprise contrary to basic principles of justice and fair play.