In the case of In re Cooper, the petitioner was a lawyer who had been disbarred by the Supreme Court of Kansas for professional misconduct. He appealed to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that his disbarment violated his rights under federal law. The court ruled against him, stating that it did not have jurisdiction over matters related to attorney discipline at state level unless there is an allegation and proof that such disciplinary proceedings denied federal rights protected by law. It held that states have inherent power in controlling conduct of attorneys practicing within their jurisdictions and this does not infrally upon any prerogative of national government or violate any right secured or protected by Constitution. Therefore, Mr. Cooper's appeal was dismissed.

The dissenting opinion in the case of In re Cooper, 1890, argued that the petitioner's right to a fair trial was violated. The justice believed that the court had overstepped its bounds by refusing to grant Cooper a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. He contended that this decision undermined the fundamental principles of justice and fairness upon which our legal system is built. Furthermore, he expressed concern about setting a dangerous precedent where courts could dismiss potentially exculpatory evidence without proper consideration or examination. This would effectively deny defendants their constitutional right to present all relevant facts and arguments in their defense. Thus, while acknowledging the need for finality in judicial proceedings, he insisted it should not come at the expense of truth and justice.