In the case of In re Cooper, 1891, the petitioner was a lawyer who had been disbarred by the Supreme Court of Kansas for unprofessional conduct. He appealed to the US Supreme Court on grounds that he had not received due process and equal protection under law as guaranteed by Fourteenth Amendment. The court ruled against him stating that it did not have jurisdiction over matters related to state bar admissions or disciplinary actions unless there is a federal question involved. It further clarified that while states cannot deny any person within its jurisdiction equal protection under law, this does not mean every individual has an absolute right to practice law in all cases without meeting certain standards set by state laws regarding qualifications and professional conduct for lawyers.

The dissenting opinion in the case of In re Cooper, 1891, argued that the court had overstepped its jurisdiction. The justice contended that it was not within the purview of federal courts to interfere with state proceedings unless there was a clear violation of constitutional rights. He believed that this particular case did not meet such criteria and thus should have been left to be resolved by state authorities. Furthermore, he expressed concern about setting a precedent where federal courts could intervene in local matters without sufficient cause or justification. This perspective emphasized respect for states' rights and autonomy as well as caution against unwarranted judicial activism at the federal level.