The Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United States case in 1977 revolved around the interpretation of a clause in the Clean Air Act, which made it illegal to violate any emission standard or limitation established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA had issued regulations for asbestos emissions during demolition operations and charged Adamo Wrecking Company with violating these standards at a site in Detroit, Michigan. However, Adamo argued that their actions were not criminal because they did not violate an "emission standard," but rather a "work practice" regulation - two distinct categories under the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Adamo Wrecking Company on this technicality, stating that Congress intended only violations of emission standards to be criminally punishable under this specific section of law. Therefore, while work practices could still be regulated by the EPA and civil penalties could apply for non-compliance, such violations would not carry criminal charges.

In the dissenting opinion for Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United States, Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's interpretation of the Clean Air Act was incorrect and overly narrow. He contended that Congress intended to regulate all sources of air pollution, not just stationary ones as interpreted by the majority. Furthermore, he disagreed with their view that a 'source' could only refer to a physical structure or device emitting pollutants; instead, he believed it should also include activities like demolition which can significantly contribute to air pollution levels in an area. The justice asserted that this broader interpretation better aligned with Congressional intent behind enacting such legislation - protecting public health from harmful effects of air pollution regardless of its source.