In the 1902 Supreme Court case, Champion v. Ames (also known as The Lottery Case), the court upheld a federal law that banned interstate transportation of lottery tickets. Charles Champion was indicted for shipping Paraguayan lottery tickets from Texas to California and he challenged this indictment on constitutional grounds, arguing that Congress had overstepped its authority by regulating commerce in such a way. However, the Supreme Court ruled against him with a 5-4 decision stating that Congress has broad power under the Commerce Clause to regulate not just goods but also harmful activities across state lines. This ruling expanded Congressional power under the Commerce Clause and set an important precedent for future cases involving federal regulation of economic activity.

In the dissenting opinion for Champion v. Ames, Justice Harlan argued that Congress had overstepped its bounds by banning the interstate transport of lottery tickets. He believed this was a matter of state regulation and not federal jurisdiction. Harlan stated that if Congress could regulate such matters under the guise of regulating commerce, it would essentially give them unlimited power to legislate on any topic they saw fit, which he viewed as contrary to the principles of limited government enshrined in the Constitution. Furthermore, he contended that allowing Congress to ban items deemed immoral or harmful could lead down a slippery slope where other goods might be banned based on subjective moral judgments rather than objective harm or illegality.