In the 1892 case of Ogden v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning bankruptcy law and property rights. The dispute arose when Ogden, who had filed for bankruptcy, claimed that certain assets should not be included in his estate because they were held as collateral by creditors at the time he declared bankruptcy. However, these assets had been transferred to him after he filed for bankruptcy but before proceedings began. The court decided against Ogden's argument stating that all property acquired by a bankrupt between filing and adjudication is part of their estate subject to distribution among creditors under section 70a(5) of Bankruptcy Act even if it was pledged as security prior to filing for bankruptcy. This decision clarified how assets are treated in relation to timing during a declaration of personal or business insolvency.

In the dissenting opinion for Ogden v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's interpretation of the law was too broad and could potentially criminalize innocent behavior. He contended that while Congress has a right to regulate commerce, it does not have unlimited power to punish any act which may indirectly affect such commerce. The statute in question made it illegal for anyone "engaged in trade or commerce" among states to make certain types of contracts; however, according to Justice Brewer, this should only apply when such contracts are directly related to interstate trade or commerce. In his view, if an individual is engaged in both local and interstate business activities but makes a contract solely relating to their local business operations - as he believed was true in this case - then they should not be subject to federal punishment under this statute.