In the case of Rossi v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1914, the U.S Supreme Court ruled against Mr. Rossi who was convicted for selling liquor without a license in violation of state law. The defendant argued that his conviction violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection under the law because he had been singled out for prosecution while others similarly situated were not prosecuted. He also claimed that he was denied a fair trial as some jurors were biased against him due to their membership in an anti-liquor organization known as "The Law and Order Society." However, the court rejected these arguments stating that there was no evidence showing selective or discriminatory enforcement by authorities nor any bias on part of jurors which could have influenced their decision-making during trial proceedings.

In the dissenting opinion for Rossi v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the justice argued that there was a lack of sufficient evidence to convict Mr. Rossi beyond a reasonable doubt. The dissenting judge believed that the circumstantial evidence presented in this case did not conclusively prove guilt and thus should have been insufficient for conviction under law. He also criticized the majority's interpretation and application of legal principles related to criminal intent, arguing they were applied too broadly in this instance which led to an unjust outcome. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential bias in jury selection process as well as procedural errors during trial proceedings which may have influenced verdict unfairly against Mr.Rossi.