The McGowan v. Columbia River Packers' Association case in 1917 revolved around the issue of fishing rights on the Columbia River, specifically concerning salmon. The plaintiffs were fishermen who claimed that they had exclusive rights to fish for salmon at a particular location within the river due to an Oregon statute granting them such privileges. However, this was contested by the defendants - canning companies and other commercial entities - who argued that these exclusive fishing rights violated their own right to equal protection under law as per Fourteenth Amendment of US Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants stating that while states have authority over fisheries within their borders, they cannot grant monopolistic privileges which infringe upon others' equal protection rights guaranteed by federal constitution. Therefore, it held that Oregon's statute granting special fishing privileges was unconstitutional.

In the dissenting opinion for McGowan v. Columbia River Packers' Association, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar issues and violated principles of equal protection under law. He contended that the Oregon statute in question, which prohibited fishing during certain periods but allowed exceptions for fish canneries, unfairly favored one group over another without a reasonable basis. According to him, there was no substantial difference between those who fished for their own consumption or sale and those who fished to supply canneries; thus both should be subject to same restrictions or exemptions. Furthermore, he believed this case raised serious questions about state power versus individual rights as it seemed states could arbitrarily interfere with personal liberty and property rights under guise of police power regulation.