In McAleer v. United States (1893), the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a case involving an individual who had been convicted of embezzlement while serving as an officer in a national bank. The defendant, Mr. McAleer, argued that he was not guilty because the money he took was from his own personal account at the bank and therefore did not belong to another depositor or creditor of the institution. However, under federal law at that time, it was considered embezzlement for any officer or employee of a national banking association to fraudulently take or misapply any funds belonging to such association with intent to convert them into their own use. The court upheld Mr. McAleer's conviction by stating that even though the funds were technically in his name when they were taken out of circulation and placed into his private account, they still belonged collectively to all depositors and creditors until legally withdrawn from circulation by him through proper procedures set forth by banking laws and regulations. Therefore, despite being listed under his name in one particular account within this collective pool of resources managed by the bank on behalf of its clients - these funds remained property owned jointly among all stakeholders involved rather than becoming exclusively owned assets controlled solely according to individual discretion exercised unilaterally without due process observed properly beforehand.

In the dissenting opinion for McAleer v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an unlawful search was fundamentally flawed. He contended that this ruling violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, which he believed should apply regardless of whether or not incriminating evidence is discovered as a result. In his view, allowing such evidence to be used in court effectively condones illegal government actions and undermines citizens' constitutional rights. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses of power if law enforcement officials are permitted to violate individuals' privacy with impunity in their pursuit of justice.