In the 1911 case of Quong Wing v. Kirkendall, a Chinese laundry owner in Montana named Quong Wing challenged a state law that imposed higher licensing fees on non-citizen immigrants from China who operated laundries than it did on other individuals running similar businesses. The Supreme Court upheld the law, ruling against Quong Wing. They concluded that while the Fourteenth Amendment protected all persons within U.S jurisdiction from being deprived of life, liberty or property without due process and equal protection under laws, this did not extend to foreign nations' subjects residing in America but still owing allegiance to their home countries. Therefore, states could legally discriminate against them through legislation like Montana's laundry license fee statute.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Quong Wing v. Kirkendall argued that the Montana law, which taxed laundry businesses owned by Chinese immigrants more heavily than those owned by non-Chinese individuals, was not discriminatory and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The justice reasoned that it was within a state's power to impose taxes on certain classes of people or property for public purposes as long as it didn't infringe upon any federal constitutional prohibitions. He further contended that this tax could be seen as an exercise of police power aimed at addressing social issues associated with Chinese laundries at that time rather than being racially motivated discrimination. Therefore, he believed there were grounds to uphold this law despite its apparent unequal application.