The McGinis et al. v. People of the State of California case in 1917 revolved around a dispute over land ownership and mineral rights in California. The plaintiffs, McGinis and others, claimed that they had acquired title to certain lands under an Act of Congress from 1866 which granted "the right-of-way for the construction of highways over public lands not reserved for public purposes." They argued that this act also conferred them with exclusive mining rights on these lands. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that while the Act did grant right-of-way for highway construction, it did not confer any additional privileges such as mining or possession rights beyond what was necessary for road building purposes. Therefore, their claim to exclusive mineral rights was invalid because those were still vested with the government unless explicitly transferred by law.

The dissenting opinion in the case of McGinis et al. v. People of the State of California argued that the majority's decision was a violation of due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenters contended that by allowing evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure to be used in court, it effectively condoned unlawful police conduct and undermined constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. They believed this ruling would set a dangerous precedent, encouraging law enforcement officers to disregard citizens' constitutional rights with impunity as long as they could secure convictions using illegally obtained evidence. This view held that such practices were fundamentally incompatible with principles of justice, fairness, and respect for individual liberties at the heart of American democracy.