The Pennsylvania Bureau of Correction v. United States Marshals Service case in 1985 revolved around the issue of who should bear the cost for housing federal prisoners in state facilities. The U.S. Marshals Service had been deducting a "subsistence fee" from payments made to states for holding federal detainees, which Pennsylvania's Bureau of Corrections challenged as unlawful under an agreement between the two parties and contrary to statutory law. However, the Supreme Court ruled against Pennsylvania, upholding that such deductions were lawful and within administrative discretion granted by Congress to set reasonable rates for prisoner care and custody costs. Therefore, it was determined that states could be charged fees when they house federal inmates.

In the dissenting opinion for Pennsylvania Bureau of Correction v. United States Marshals Service, Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's interpretation of federal law regarding who should bear the cost of housing federal prisoners in state facilities. He argued that Congress intended to place this financial burden on the Federal Government, not on individual states. The legislative history and statutory language supported his view that Congress wanted to reimburse states for these costs as part of its commitment to cooperative federalism. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies in how different jurisdictions interpreted this law due to lack of clarity from previous court decisions and urged a more uniform approach based on Congressional intent.