In the case of Henry et al. v. City of Rock Hill in 1963, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that state trespassing convictions related to racial protests were invalid because they conflicted with federal law. The defendants, nine African-American students who became known as "The Friendship Nine," had been convicted for trespassing after staging a sit-in at a segregated lunch counter in South Carolina and refusing to leave when asked by management. They appealed their conviction on constitutional grounds but were unsuccessful until reaching the Supreme Court which reversed their convictions based on its decision from another similar case (Peterson v. City of Greenville). This ruling was significant as it effectively invalidated many similar convictions across southern states and provided legal protection for peaceful civil rights demonstrations against segregation.

In the dissenting opinion for Henry et al. v. City of Rock Hill, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to apply their ruling retroactively was a departure from established legal principles and precedent. He contended that such a change should be made by legislation rather than judicial interpretation, as it affected not only the parties involved in this case but also numerous other cases pending appeal or trial across many jurisdictions. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential implications on state sovereignty and federalism because states were being denied their right to enforce local criminal laws due to federal court decisions regarding constitutional issues. Lastly, he questioned whether it was appropriate for courts to intervene in matters traditionally left up to executive pardoning power.