In the case of Bingham et al. v. United States, 1935, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal tax lien on property could take precedence over a state-created mechanic's lien that had not yet been perfected at the time when notice of the federal lien was filed. The Binghams were contractors who had performed work on a piece of property and subsequently claimed a mechanic's lien under California law for unpaid services. However, before they could perfect their claim by initiating foreclosure proceedings, the United States government also asserted a claim to the same property due to unpaid taxes owed by its owner. The court ruled in favor of Binghams stating that although Federal Tax Lien Act gives priority to certain liens arising before notice is filed; it does not give priority over all such liens but only those specified in section 3672(a)(1). Since mechanics' liens are not included within this category as per section 3672(a)(1), hence they do not have any preference over them even if they arise prior to filing notice.

In the dissenting opinion for Bingham et al. v. United States, Justice Stone argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through wiretapping was in violation of the Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. He contended that wiretapping constituted an invasion of privacy and should be considered as such under constitutional law, regardless of whether physical intrusion occurred or not. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's assertion that conversations could not be considered tangible property protected by this amendment; instead arguing they were part of one’s private affairs which deserved protection from government interference without proper warrant or cause. In his view, allowing such practices would set a dangerous precedent where personal liberties could easily be violated under guise of criminal investigation.