In the case of Orr v. Allen et al., 1918, the United States Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required railroad companies to provide separate but equal accommodations for black and white passengers violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiff, Orr, argued that Alabama's segregation laws were discriminatory and unconstitutional. However, the court upheld these laws stating they did not violate any constitutional rights as long as facilities provided were substantially equal in quality and convenience. This ruling reinforced racial segregation under "separate but equal" doctrine until it was later overturned by Brown v Board of Education in 1954.

The dissenting opinion in the case of ORR v. ALLEN et al., 1918, argued that the majority's decision to uphold Alabama's law prohibiting interracial marriage was a violation of both due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissent contended that this law infringed upon an individual’s fundamental right to marry, which should not be restricted based on race. Furthermore, it asserted that such laws were inherently discriminatory as they disproportionately affected African Americans and were rooted in racial prejudice rather than any legitimate state interest. Therefore, according to the dissenters' view, these laws should have been subjected to strict scrutiny - a higher level of judicial review for potentially unconstitutional legislation – and ultimately struck down as violating constitutional principles of equality and fairness.