In the 1891 case of Lau Ow Bew, a Chinese immigrant appealed his denial of entry into the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lau Ow Bew, stating that he was wrongfully denied entry under the Chinese Exclusion Act because he had proven himself to be a merchant and not a laborer as defined by said act. The court found that there were errors made during his examination at immigration control which led to an incorrect classification of him as being ineligible for admission into the country. This decision established important legal precedent regarding due process rights for immigrants and clarified interpretations around exceptions within exclusionary immigration laws.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Lau Ow Bew in 1891, Justice Brewer argued that the petitioner should not be denied entry into the United States. He disagreed with his fellow justices' interpretation of immigration law and believed that it was being applied too broadly to exclude Chinese laborers who had a legitimate right to return after visiting China. According to him, this broad application violated their rights under existing treaties between China and America. Furthermore, he contended that there were no clear guidelines on what constituted "credible evidence" required by authorities before denying someone's re-entry into America; hence leaving room for potential abuse or arbitrary decisions by officials at ports of entry. Therefore, he felt that Lau Ow Bew’s deportation order was unjustified as it did not meet these standards.