In the 1905 case Burton v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a defendant cannot be tried and convicted for two offenses arising from the same act or transaction under different sections of an Act of Congress unless clear language in the statute permits such double punishment. The court held that Burton's conviction on both counts was not permissible because they arose from one sale which constituted a single offense against law, even though it involved violation of two statutory provisions. The case involved Joseph R. Burton, a Senator from Kansas who had been indicted on six charges related to his agreement to represent a company before federal departments while serving as senator - acts prohibited by federal law at that time. He was found guilty on five out of six counts but appealed his conviction arguing he should have only been charged with one count since all charges stemmed from one agreement with Rialto Grain & Securities Company.

In the dissenting opinion for Burton v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the court had overstepped its bounds by interpreting legislative intent rather than strictly adhering to constitutional law. He believed that it was not within the purview of the judiciary to determine whether or not Congress intended for a particular piece of legislation to apply in certain circumstances; instead, he felt this responsibility fell squarely on Congress itself. Furthermore, he maintained that if there were any ambiguity about how a law should be applied, it should be resolved in favor of liberty and against punishment. In his view, Burton's conviction represented an unwarranted expansion of federal power at the expense of individual rights and freedoms.