In the case of Kramer et al. v. United States, 1917, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal statute that made it illegal to conspire to defraud the United States by impeding its functions was applicable when defendants attempted to prevent enforcement of Prohibition laws through bribery and corruption. The defendants were charged with conspiring to bribe public officials in order for them not enforce prohibition laws against certain establishments selling alcohol illegally. The court ruled unanimously in favor of the government, upholding convictions against those who had been found guilty at trial level. It held that any conspiracy aimed at obstructing or defeating "the lawful function of any department" fell under this law's purview - including attempts to undermine Prohibition enforcement via corrupt means. This decision reinforced an interpretation where actions intended to interfere with governmental operations through unlawful methods constituted a crime under federal law; even if such actions targeted specific policies like Prohibition rather than directly attacking government functionality as a whole.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kramer et al. v. United States argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through wiretapping was an infringement upon individual privacy rights protected by the Fourth Amendment. The dissenters contended that wiretapping constituted an unreasonable search and seizure, as it involved intrusion into private communications without proper warrant or cause. They further asserted that allowing such evidence to be used in court would set a dangerous precedent for future cases, potentially leading to widespread violations of constitutional rights under the guise of law enforcement activities. In their view, upholding this conviction undermined fundamental principles of justice and fairness within the American legal system.