In Pope v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a contractor who had been sued by the government for breach of contract. The case revolved around whether or not a contractor could be held liable for damages if they were unable to complete their work due to unforeseen circumstances beyond their control. In this instance, Mr. Pope was contracted by the U.S government to construct missile sites but was unable to finish his work because he did not receive necessary security clearances from the Air Force on time and thus faced delays that led him into financial ruin and inability to complete his contractual obligations. The court found that since it was impossible for Mr.Pope's company to fulfill its end of the bargain due solely because of actions taken by another branch of federal government (the Air Force), then it would be unfair and unjustifiable under law principles, specifically impossibility doctrine,  to hold them responsible for breaching said contract.

In the dissenting opinion for Pope v. United States, Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold Pope's conviction was a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. He contended that by allowing evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure to be used in court, the Supreme Court was effectively condoning illegal police conduct. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "reasonable doubt," arguing that it should not include doubts based on mere conjecture or speculation. Instead, he believed reasonable doubt should only refer to serious doubts grounded in reason and common sense after careful consideration of all evidence presented during trial.