In the 1907 case of Chin Yow v. United States, Chinese immigrant Chin Yow contested his deportation order on grounds that he was a merchant and thus exempt from the provisions of the Chinese Exclusion Act. The Supreme Court ruled against him, upholding his deportation order. The court found that while there were some inconsistencies in testimonies regarding whether or not he was a laborer (which would make him subject to exclusion), these discrepancies did not necessarily prove perjury or fraud as claimed by Yow's defense team. Furthermore, it held that even if such inconsistencies existed, they were irrelevant because immigration officials had broad discretion in determining who could be admitted into the country under existing laws at that time.

In the dissenting opinion for Chin Yow v. United States, Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling that denied citizenship to a Chinese-born individual who claimed American parentage. He argued that the case should have been remanded back to the district court so that further evidence could be presented and examined in order to establish whether or not Chin Yow was indeed born of an American father as he claimed. The justice believed it was unjust and unconstitutional for courts to deny individuals their rights without giving them adequate opportunity to present evidence supporting their claims. Furthermore, he criticized what he saw as an inherent bias against Chinese immigrants within both society at large and legal proceedings specifically, arguing this prejudice had influenced decisions made in this case.