In the 1951 case of Ex Parte Cogdell et al., a group of African American plaintiffs from Texas filed a petition for habeas corpus, challenging their convictions on charges related to voting fraud. The defendants argued that they were denied equal protection under the law because they were prosecuted by an all-white grand jury in violation of their Fourteenth Amendment rights. However, the Supreme Court dismissed this argument stating that it was not sufficient grounds for federal intervention as there was no evidence showing intentional discrimination or denial of due process. Furthermore, it stated that issues regarding composition and selection procedures for juries should be addressed at state level rather than federal level courts unless there is clear proof of racial bias or other constitutional violations.

In the dissenting opinion for Ex parte Cogdell et al., 1951, it was argued that the majority's decision to deny habeas corpus relief to petitioners who were held in custody by state authorities violated their constitutional rights. The dissenting justices believed that this case presented a clear instance of racial discrimination and violation of due process under law, as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. They contended that there was substantial evidence showing that African American citizens were systematically excluded from grand jury service in Jefferson County, Alabama where these indictments occurred. This exclusion resulted in an unfair trial for the petitioners since they did not have a chance to be tried by a jury composed of their peers without regard to race or color. Therefore, according to them, federal courts should intervene when state courts fail or refuse to protect federally secured rights such as equal protection and due process under law.