In the case of Hogan v. O'Neill, Chief of Police of the City of East Orange, New Jersey in 1920, plaintiff John J. Hogan sued for damages after being arrested and detained by defendant James F. O’Neill on charges that were later dismissed due to lack of evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hogan, stating that an arrest without a warrant is only justifiable if there is probable cause or reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been committed by the person being arrested. In this instance, it was determined that no such probable cause existed at the time when Hogan was taken into custody; therefore his arrest and subsequent detention were deemed unlawful.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Hogan v. O'Neill, Chief of Police of the City of East Orange, New Jersey argued that the majority's decision to uphold a city ordinance prohibiting public speaking without a permit was an infringement on First Amendment rights. The dissenters believed that this ruling gave too much power to local authorities and could potentially be used as a tool for censorship or suppression of unpopular views. They contended that freedom of speech is one of our most fundamental constitutional protections and should not be subject to such restrictions. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuse by those in power who might use this law to silence political opposition or suppress minority voices.