In Johnson v. United States (1895), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a warrantless search of a private residence was unconstitutional, even if it resulted in the discovery of illegal activity. The case involved Robert S. Johnson who had been convicted for illegally distilling spirits without paying taxes on them after federal agents searched his home without a warrant and found an illicit still operation inside. In its decision, the court held that evidence obtained through such searches could not be used in court because they violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. This ruling reinforced citizens' rights to privacy within their own homes and set important precedents regarding law enforcement procedures.

In the dissenting opinion for Johnson v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on state bank notes was unconstitutional. The dissenting justices believed this case represented an overreach of federal power and violated states' rights under the Constitution. They contended that Congress did not have unlimited authority to levy taxes and its powers were restricted by other constitutional provisions, including those protecting states' rights. Furthermore, they asserted that if Congress could impose such a tax, it would effectively give them control over state banks which contradicted principles of federalism enshrined in the Constitution. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of congressional taxing power and maintained that this particular tax should be struck down as unconstitutional.