In the case Department of Motor Vehicles of California v. Rios, 1972, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Rios. The issue at hand was whether a state could suspend or revoke a driver's license without providing an opportunity for hearing and judicial review under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment. The court held that such action violated procedural due process rights as it deprived individuals their property interest in driving privileges without proper notice and opportunity to be heard before impartial tribunal. This decision underscored the importance of ensuring fair procedures are followed by administrative agencies when making decisions affecting individual’s legal rights.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Department of Motor Vehicles of California v. Rios argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law allowing for the suspension or revocation of driver's licenses without providing an opportunity for a hearing was unconstitutional. The dissenters believed this violated due process rights, as it did not allow individuals to challenge their suspensions or revocations before they took effect. They also expressed concern about potential abuses and misapplications by administrative agencies, arguing that such unchecked power could lead to arbitrary decisions and unfair treatment. Furthermore, they pointed out that driving is often essential for employment and daily life activities; thus, taking away someone’s license can have severe consequences on their livelihoods which further underscores the need for procedural safeguards.