In the 1925 case of Ex Parte Gruber, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed a petition for habeas corpus by an individual who had been convicted in a state court and was serving his sentence in a state prison. The petitioner argued that he had been denied due process because he was not allowed to present evidence at trial that would have proven his innocence. However, the Supreme Court ruled against him, stating that it did not have jurisdiction over such matters unless there were exceptional circumstances or constitutional questions involved which could only be resolved by federal courts. In this case, they found no such issues existed and therefore dismissed the petition.

The dissenting opinion in the Ex Parte Gruber case argued that the petitioner should have been granted a writ of habeas corpus. The justice disagreed with the majority's view that Gruber had waived his right to challenge his detention by failing to raise it at trial or on direct appeal. He contended that this was an overly strict interpretation of procedural rules and overlooked the fundamental issue at stake: whether Gruber's constitutional rights were violated when he was detained without probable cause. Furthermore, he believed there was sufficient evidence suggesting misconduct on part of law enforcement officials involved in Gruber’s arrest and subsequent detention, which warranted further investigation. Therefore, denying him relief under these circumstances undermined principles of fairness and due process enshrined in American jurisprudence.