The U.S. Supreme Court case Chase, Jr., a Minor, etc. v. United States in 1920 revolved around the issue of whether or not the federal government had jurisdiction over crimes committed on Indian reservations by non-Indians against Indians. The minor, Chase Jr., was charged with murdering another Indian on an Indian reservation and argued that since he was a member of an indigenous tribe living on tribal land, his case should be handled by tribal courts rather than federal ones. However, the court ruled against him stating that under General Crimes Act (also known as Federal Enclaves Act), Congress has given federal courts jurisdiction over such cases regardless of where they occur or who is involved if it involves major crimes like murder.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Chase Jr., a minor, etc. v. United States argued that the government had overstepped its bounds by prosecuting a minor for mail fraud under federal law. The dissent believed that this was an issue better left to state courts and local authorities, as it pertained more directly to issues of family law and child welfare than to federal concerns about mail fraud or interstate commerce. They also expressed concern about the potential for abuse if such broad interpretations of federal jurisdiction were allowed to stand, arguing that it could lead to undue interference in matters traditionally handled by states and potentially infringe upon individual rights and liberties.