In the case of David Dawson v. Delaware, 1991, Dawson was convicted for murder and sentenced to death in a Delaware court. During his trial, the prosecution introduced evidence that he was part of a white supremacist prison gang known as Aryan Brotherhood which had no relevance to the crime committed. The Supreme Court ruled this as unconstitutional because it violated Dawson's Fourteenth Amendment rights by introducing potentially prejudicial information without any direct link or relevancy to the crime charged against him. This ruling emphasized that while membership in an organization can be used as evidence if its philosophies are directly related to the alleged criminal behavior, mere affiliation is not enough grounds for inclusion during trials.

In the dissenting opinion for David Dawson v. Delaware, Justice Thomas argued that the First Amendment should not be used to protect a defendant from having his association with a racist group presented as evidence in court. He believed that this information was relevant and could help establish motive or intent in certain cases, particularly those involving hate crimes. Furthermore, he contended that excluding such evidence might hinder the prosecution's ability to present its case fully and fairly. The majority's decision, according to him, unnecessarily restricted prosecutors and could potentially lead to unjust outcomes by preventing juries from considering all pertinent facts about defendants' backgrounds and beliefs.