In the case of Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms and Paroles, 1957, petitioner Eskridge was convicted for burglary in the second degree and sentenced to a maximum term of fifteen years imprisonment by a state court. He later filed an application for writ of habeas corpus alleging that his constitutional rights were violated due to being denied parole without any reason given or hearing held. The Supreme Court dismissed this claim stating that there is no constitutional right to parole; it is merely a privilege granted by the state legislature which can be withdrawn at its discretion. Furthermore, since there are no statutory requirements mandating reasons be provided when denying parole or requiring hearings prior to denial, these actions did not infringe upon his rights under federal law either.

In the dissenting opinion for Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms and Paroles, Justice Frankfurter argued that the Court had overstepped its bounds by intervening in a state's administration of its parole system. He contended that it was not within the jurisdiction of federal courts to review decisions made by state parole boards unless there was evidence of gross abuse or arbitrariness which violated constitutional rights. In this case, he did not believe such violations were present. The justice further emphasized his belief in judicial restraint and deference to state authorities on matters pertaining to their own penal systems, cautioning against unwarranted interference from federal courts.