Gibson v. Warden was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1871. The case involved a prisoner, William Gibson, who was convicted of murder in the state of Maryland and sentenced to death. Gibson appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court, arguing that his conviction was unconstitutional because he had not been given a fair trial. The Supreme Court agreed with Gibson and overturned his conviction. The Court held that the trial court had violated Gibson's right to due process by not allowing him to present evidence in his defense. The Court also held that the trial court had failed to provide Gibson with a fair and impartial jury. The decision in Gibson v. Warden was significant because it established the principle that all criminal defendants must be given a fair trial and that they must be allowed to present evidence in their defense. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then and has become an important part of the American criminal justice system.

In Gibson v. Warden, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving an alleged violation of federal law. The majority opinion held that the state court did have jurisdiction and could proceed with its proceedings. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that it violated fundamental principles of constitutional law by allowing states to interfere in matters which were exclusively within the purview of Congress and thus beyond their power. He argued that if such interference was allowed then it would lead to confusion between federal and state laws as well as undermine national unity since different states might interpret federal laws differently leading to conflicting outcomes across jurisdictions. Furthermore, he noted that allowing states courts to adjudicate cases involving violations of federal statutes would also be contrary to established legal precedent which clearly stated only Congress has authority over these matters.