In the 1973 case of Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, et al. v. Turley et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state cannot compel testimony from an individual by threatening to terminate their public contracts or bar them from future ones if they invoke their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The case involved two contractors who refused to waive this right during a corruption investigation and were subsequently barred from further state contracts as per New York law at the time. The court held that such punitive measures violated the constitutional protection against self-incrimination because it forced individuals to choose between incriminating themselves or suffering economic loss.

In the dissenting opinion for Lefkowitz v. Turley, Justice White argued that the majority's decision to extend Fifth Amendment protection to government contractors was misguided and could potentially undermine public trust in governmental operations. He contended that a contractor who willingly enters into an agreement with the state should not be allowed to refuse answering questions about his performance under contract on grounds of self-incrimination. This refusal, he believed, would allow dishonest contractors to escape accountability for their actions while still reaping benefits from their contracts with the state. Furthermore, he expressed concern over how this ruling might affect future cases involving corruption or fraud within government contracting processes.