In the 1898 case of Anderson v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving jury selection in federal courts. The petitioner, Anderson, was convicted for murder in Indian Territory and appealed his conviction on grounds that African Americans were systematically excluded from his grand jury panel. He argued this violated his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. However, the court held that while systematic exclusion based on race would indeed be unconstitutional if it occurred within a state jurisdiction due to Fourteenth Amendment protections; those same protections did not apply to federal jurisdictions like Indian Territory where only Fifth Amendment guarantees applied at that time (which do not explicitly prohibit racial discrimination). Therefore, despite acknowledging potential racial bias in jury selection process as wrong and harmful to public confidence in justice system; because it happened within a federal jurisdiction rather than state one - no constitutional violation had occurred according to then-current interpretation of law.

In the dissenting opinion for Anderson v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was a dangerous expansion of federal power over state affairs. He contended that it was not within Congress' authority to regulate local elections and punish fraud under its constitutional mandate to ensure states maintain a "republican form of government." Brewer believed this interpretation could lead to an unchecked federal intrusion into state matters, undermining the balance between national and local governance established by the Constitution. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses of such broad powers by political parties in control at any given time. Therefore, while acknowledging election fraud as a serious issue needing attention, Justice Brewer disagreed with using this case as grounds for expanding federal jurisdiction beyond what he considered constitutionally appropriate limits.