In the case of Pointer v. Texas, 1964, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a defendant's right to confront witnesses against him is a fundamental right and is made obligatory on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved an individual named Pointer who was convicted of robbery in Texas based largely on testimony given at a preliminary hearing where he had no counsel present. The witness did not appear at trial and his previous testimony was used instead. On appeal, it was argued that this violated Pointer's Sixth Amendment rights to confront his accuser directly during trial proceedings. The court agreed with this argument stating that cross-examination is an essential part of ensuring fair trials under American judicial standards and thus must be protected under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Pointer v. Texas, Justice Tom C. Clark argued that the majority's decision to apply the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation to state courts was a departure from precedent and an unnecessary expansion of federal power over states' rights. He contended that this ruling would disrupt established legal procedures in many states and potentially lead to retrials in countless cases where defendants had been convicted without being able to cross-examine witnesses against them. Furthermore, he believed it was not necessary for ensuring fair trials because most states already provided similar protections under their own laws or constitutions, making federal intervention redundant and intrusive on state sovereignty.