The Schneider v. State (Town of Irvington) case in 1939 revolved around the constitutionality of local ordinances that prohibited door-to-door solicitation and distribution of literature without prior permission from authorities. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that these ordinances were unconstitutional, violating the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech and press. The court held that distributing pamphlets or leaflets is a form of communication protected by the Constitution, regardless if it’s for protest, information sharing or religious purposes. Furthermore, they argued that requiring permits gave too much power to officials who could deny them based on personal bias or prejudice against certain ideas or beliefs expressed in such materials.

In the dissenting opinion for Schneider v. State (Town of Irvington), Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision undermined local governments' ability to maintain order and cleanliness in public spaces. He contended that municipalities should have the right to regulate activities such as distributing handbills, which can lead to littering and other forms of disorder. Furthermore, he believed that these regulations did not infringe upon First Amendment rights because they were content-neutral - applying equally regardless of what message was being conveyed by those handing out materials. In his view, allowing towns and cities to enforce such rules would help prevent public nuisances without unduly restricting freedom of speech or press.