The U.S. Supreme Court case Newberry et al. v. United States in 1920 revolved around the issue of whether Congress had the authority to regulate primary elections under Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution, which gives it power over "the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives." Truman H. Newberry was a Michigan senator who was convicted for spending more than $10 per voter during his campaign - an amount exceeding federal limits at that time - in violation of Federal Corrupt Practices Act (1911). The Supreme Court ruled by a narrow margin (5-4) that primaries were not considered elections as defined by the Constitution; therefore, they could not be regulated by Congress under its election powers granted therein. As such, Newberry's conviction was overturned on grounds that he did not violate any constitutional law since there were no regulations governing primary campaigns when he ran for office.

In the dissenting opinion for Newberry v. United States, Justice Holmes argued that Congress had the power to regulate primary elections under Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution. He contended that primaries are an integral part of the electoral process and therefore fall within congressional authority over "the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections." The majority's narrow interpretation undermined this constitutional provision by excluding a significant portion of modern election procedures from federal oversight. Furthermore, he disagreed with their view that states have exclusive control over primary elections because it contradicted previous court decisions recognizing federal jurisdiction in these matters when they affect national interests. Thus, he believed that Truman H. Newberry’s conviction for violating campaign expenditure limits during his Senate primary should be upheld as constitutional.