In Flaxer v. United States (1958), the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving Abraham Flaxer, who was convicted of contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions during a hearing before the House Committee on Un-American Activities. The committee had been investigating alleged Communist infiltration in labor unions and subpoenaed Flaxer as he was president of the American Communications Association, which had reportedly been under communist influence. He refused to answer certain questions about his association with known communists or communist organizations, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction by 5-4 vote stating that he failed to properly invoke his Fifth Amendment rights because he did not claim that answering these specific questions would incriminate him but rather made a broad assertion over all questioning. The court held that it is necessary for witnesses before congressional committees to specifically object on grounds of potential self-incrimination question by question instead of making blanket refusals.

In the dissenting opinion for Flaxer v. United States, Justice Black argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through wiretapping violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. He contended that allowing such evidence would essentially condone illegal government activity and undermine citizens' constitutional rights. Furthermore, he believed this ruling could potentially lead to an increase in governmental intrusion into private lives under the guise of law enforcement needs. In his view, any information obtained illegally should not be used as evidence in court regardless of its relevance or importance to a case.