In the Price v. Henkel case of 1909, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a person could be forcibly transported from one district to another for trial under a federal warrant without violating their constitutional rights. The defendant, Morris K. Price, was arrested in New York on charges related to illegal land transactions in Oklahoma and Alabama but refused extradition to these states for trial. He argued that his forced removal violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures and Fifth Amendment right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law. However, the court disagreed with this argument stating that once legally arrested under a valid warrant issued by any United States commissioner or judge anywhere within the jurisdiction of United States government; such individual can be taken into custody and brought before a court where an indictment has been found against him/her.

In the dissenting opinion for Price v. Henkel, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to allow a person arrested in one district under an indictment issued in another district to be transported without first being taken before a magistrate was contrary to both statutory law and constitutional rights. He contended that this interpretation of federal statutes undermined the right of habeas corpus and violated protections against unreasonable seizures by allowing individuals to be forcibly moved across state lines without any immediate judicial oversight or review. Furthermore, he believed it could potentially lead to abuses by enabling authorities to arrest someone on minor charges only as a pretext for transporting them elsewhere where they might face more serious accusations. This would effectively bypass their right not only for prompt appearance before a judge but also their ability to challenge extradition if applicable.