In the case of Pointer v. United States in 1893, the Supreme Court ruled that a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him is applicable not only in federal courts but also extends to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved Robert Pointer who was convicted for robbery based on an absent witness' testimony from a preliminary hearing where he had no counsel present. The court overturned his conviction stating that using this testimony violated his constitutional rights under both amendments as it denied him the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses testifying against him - a fundamental aspect of due process and fair trial.

In the dissenting opinion for Pointer v. United States, it was argued that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not apply to state courts and therefore should not have been used as a basis for overturning Pointer's conviction in a Texas court. The dissenters believed that each state has its own constitution and laws which govern how trials are conducted within their jurisdiction, including rules about witness confrontation. They maintained that if there were any issues with how Pointer's trial was handled, they should be addressed under Texas law rather than federal law. Furthermore, they contended that applying the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to state proceedings would disrupt long-standing legal practices and potentially invalidate many past convictions obtained without adhering to this standard.