In M. Kraus & Bros., Inc. v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the interpretation of a tariff act in 1945. The plaintiff, M.Kraus & Bros., imported knitted fabrics and was charged with duties under paragraph 371 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as "knitwear". However, they argued that their goods should have been classified under paragraph 905(a) as "other manufactures of wool", which would result in lower duty charges. The Customs Court sided with the government's classification and this decision was upheld by both an appellate court and eventually by the Supreme Court itself. The primary issue at hand was whether or not these particular imports could be considered 'manufactures' within meaning of Paragraph 905(a). In its ruling, the Supreme Court held that while it is true that knitting constitutes manufacturing process; however, once fabric has been knit it cannot again become subject to another manufacturing process merely because it is cut into shape for garments without being sewn together. Therefore,the judgment affirmed customs officials' original categorization under higher-duty provision applicable to knitwear rather than lower-duty one for other woolen manufactures.

In the dissenting opinion for M. Kraus & Bros., Inc. v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction under the False Claims Act was incorrect due to an overly broad interpretation of what constitutes a "claim" against the government. The dissenting justices believed that this expansive definition could potentially criminalize any false statement made in relation to a contract with the government, even if there is no intention or attempt to defraud or cause financial loss. They also expressed concerns about potential violations of constitutional rights and principles such as freedom of speech and due process, arguing that individuals should not be punished for making false statements unless they are knowingly attempting to deceive or harm others.