In the case of Causey v. United States (1915), the petitioner, Causey, was convicted for perjury in a federal court and sentenced to imprisonment. The conviction was based on his false testimony given before a grand jury during an investigation into alleged violations of federal laws by certain corporations and individuals. Causey appealed against this decision arguing that he had been compelled to testify against himself in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. The U.S Supreme Court upheld the conviction stating that there is no constitutional right allowing someone to commit perjury when questioned under oath about past actions or events, even if those questions might incriminate them. The court ruled that while an individual cannot be forced to answer incriminating questions, once they choose to answer rather than claim their privilege against self-incrimination, they must do so truthfully.

The dissenting opinion in the Causey v. United States case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure was incorrect. The dissent emphasized that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, arguing that this protection should extend to all areas of a person's property, including outbuildings like barns or sheds. They contended that allowing such evidence to be used in court undermines these constitutional protections and sets a dangerous precedent for future cases. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view that because law enforcement had already discovered some illegal activity on part of Causey’s property (a still), it justified searching other parts without additional warrants or probable cause.