In the 1966 case of Kaye v. Co-ordinating Committee on Discipline of the Association of the Bar of The City Of New York, attorney Sidney Kaye challenged his disbarment by arguing that he was denied due process because he wasn't given a fair hearing and there were procedural errors in his disciplinary proceedings. He also claimed that his constitutional rights to free speech and assembly were violated when he was disciplined for participating in activities related to civil rights movements. However, the Supreme Court dismissed these claims stating that they lacked jurisdiction over such matters as it is primarily a state concern unless there's an allegation showing deprivation of federal rights which are constitutionally protected. In this case, no such allegations were made or proven hence affirming lower court decisions upholding Mr.Kaye’s disbarment.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kaye v. Co-ordinating Committee on Discipline of the Association of the Bar of The City Of New York, 1966 argued that there was a lack of due process for Mr. Kaye during his disciplinary proceedings by the bar association committee. It was contended that he had not been given sufficient notice or opportunity to defend himself against allegations made about him and his professional conduct as an attorney before being suspended from practice. Furthermore, it was suggested that this suspension without proper procedure violated Mr. Kaye's constitutional rights under both state and federal law, including those protected by Fourteenth Amendment guarantees to fair treatment within legal processes.