In the 1993 case of Posters 'N' Things, Ltd. v. United States, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a conviction under federal drug paraphernalia laws against a mail-order company that sold items such as pipes and bongs which could be used for illegal drugs but also had legitimate uses. The court ruled that it was not necessary to prove that the defendant specifically intended their products to be used with illegal drugs; rather, it was sufficient if they were "primarily intended or designed" for such use. This ruling clarified how intent should be determined in cases involving potentially dual-use items: by considering factors like promotional materials, sales methods and whether legitimate uses are realistically likely given its design.

In the case of Posters 'N' Things, Ltd. v. United States (1993), Justice Scalia dissented from the majority opinion, arguing that the statute at issue was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. He contended that it failed to provide clear guidelines for law enforcement officials and citizens about what conduct is prohibited, leading to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's interpretation of "primarily intended or designed for use" in drug paraphernalia laws as too subjective and open-ended. This could potentially criminalize a wide range of innocent behavior such as selling common household items like plastic bags or scales which may also be used in drug-related activities but are not primarily intended or designed for such use.