In the case of Wolfe et al. v. North Carolina, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of African American men who were convicted by an all-white jury for raping a white woman in Monroe, North Carolina. The defendants argued that their Fourteenth Amendment rights had been violated due to racial discrimination during jury selection process as no black person had served on any juries in Union County for over 60 years despite making up about 20% of the population eligible for jury duty. The court agreed with this argument and overturned their convictions stating that systematic exclusion based on race from grand or petit juries is unconstitutional and violates equal protection clause under Fourteenth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Wolfe et al. v. North Carolina, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold the convictions of six African American men violated their constitutional rights under both due process and equal protection clauses. The dissent pointed out that there were clear racial biases in jury selection, with only white jurors being selected despite a significant black population in the county where trial took place. It also highlighted issues with coerced confessions obtained by police officers who used brutal methods during interrogations without providing access to counsel or warning about self-incrimination rights - a violation of Fifth Amendment protections against forced self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to legal representation. Furthermore, it criticized how evidence from these unlawful confessions was admitted at trial without any scrutiny over its validity or reliability, undermining defendants' Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of fair trial procedures before impartial tribunal.