In the 1914 case of Reinman v. City of Little Rock, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a photographer who had been denied a permit to take photographs in a city park by local authorities. The court held that such denial was an infringement on his constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses. The plaintiff, Mr. Reinman, argued that he was being unfairly targeted as other photographers were allowed to operate within the park without permits while he was not granted one despite applying for it multiple times. He also claimed that there were no clear guidelines or criteria for granting these permits which led to arbitrary decisions by officials based on personal biases rather than objective standards or regulations. The court agreed with him stating that this lack of transparency and consistency violated his right to earn livelihood through legal means and ordered the city authorities to issue him a permit.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Reinman v. City of Little Rock argued that the city's ordinance, which prohibited any person from operating a public vehicle for hire without obtaining a license from the mayor and city council, was not unconstitutional. The justice believed that it did not infringe upon an individual’s right to earn a living or engage in lawful business activities as claimed by Reinman. Instead, he viewed it as a reasonable exercise of police power aimed at regulating businesses for public safety and welfare purposes. He contended that such licensing requirements were common practices across many cities to ensure competent service providers and protect consumers against fraud or harm. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's ruling striking down this ordinance on constitutional grounds.