In the case of Fielden v. Illinois, 1891, Samuel Fielden appealed his conviction for murder following the Haymarket Square riot in Chicago. The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether or not his First Amendment rights had been violated and if he had received a fair trial. He argued that inflammatory newspaper coverage biased potential jurors against him and that evidence used at trial was obtained through an illegal search of his home. However, the court upheld Fielden's conviction stating that there were no federal questions involved in this case as it pertained to state law violations only; therefore, they lacked jurisdiction over such matters. This decision reinforced states' authority over their own criminal justice systems while also highlighting limitations on federal judicial power.

In the dissenting opinion for Fielden v. Illinois, Justice Harlan argued that the defendants were denied a fair trial due to public prejudice and hostility against them. He believed that their political beliefs and affiliations had been used unfairly against them during the trial. Furthermore, he criticized the judge's instructions to the jury which allowed for conviction based on mere association with those who committed illegal acts rather than direct participation in or knowledge of such acts. This, according to Justice Harlan, was contrary to established principles of criminal law and justice as it essentially punished individuals not for their own actions but for those of others they may have associated with. The dissent also raised concerns about potential violations of free speech rights under First Amendment protections if people could be held criminally liable simply because they belonged to an organization whose members committed unlawful acts without their knowledge or approval.