In McDonald v. United States (1928), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure was inadmissible in court, upholding the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officials. The case involved a police officer who had entered George McDonald's room without a warrant after hearing noise from what he believed to be an illegal still for making alcohol during Prohibition era. Upon entering, he found incriminating evidence leading to McDonald’s arrest for violating prohibition laws. However, the Supreme Court held that this violated his constitutional rights as there was no exigent circumstance justifying such intrusion without a warrant.

In the dissenting opinion for McDonald v. United States, Justice Harlan Stone argued that the majority's decision to exclude evidence obtained through an illegal search was a departure from established legal principles. He contended that while it is important to deter unlawful police conduct, excluding such evidence does not necessarily achieve this goal and may instead undermine the pursuit of justice by allowing guilty parties to go free. Furthermore, he suggested that other remedies could be more effective in deterring illegal searches without compromising criminal prosecutions, such as holding law enforcement officers civilly or criminally liable for their actions. Justice Stone also expressed concern about the potential implications of this ruling on future cases involving illegally obtained evidence.