In the Elkins v. United States case of 1959, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures is not admissible in state courts as well as federal courts. This decision overturned a previous ruling known as "the silver platter doctrine," which allowed federal courts to admit evidence illegally seized by state police officers and handed over to federal officials for prosecution. The case involved two men, Irving Elkins and his son Marshall, who were convicted on charges related to operating an illegal distillery based on evidence gathered through warrantless wiretaps by local law enforcement in Oregon - a practice prohibited under Federal law but permitted under Oregon State law at that time. The Supreme Court reversed their convictions stating that any evidence obtained unconstitutionally cannot be used regardless of whether it was collected by state or federal agents.

In the dissenting opinion for Elkins v. United States, Justice Tom C. Clark argued that the majority's decision to exclude evidence obtained illegally by state officers from federal trials would undermine cooperative law enforcement efforts between states and federal government. He contended that this ruling could potentially lead to a significant increase in crime rates due to its impact on effective policing strategies. Furthermore, he expressed concern over the potential for confusion and inconsistency in applying such a rule across different jurisdictions with varying interpretations of what constitutes an 'unreasonable' search or seizure under their respective laws. Finally, he asserted that it was not within the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to dictate how state officials should conduct their investigations or enforce their own laws.