In Quinn v. United States (1954), the Supreme Court ruled that a witness who testifies before a Congressional committee cannot be prosecuted for contempt of Congress if they refuse to answer questions on constitutional grounds, unless the committee specifically overrules their objections and clearly informs them that continued refusal could lead to prosecution. The case involved John T. Quinn, who was subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee but refused to answer certain questions based on his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. He was subsequently charged with contempt of Congress. In its decision, the court emphasized that witnesses must be given a clear choice between compliance and non-compliance, understanding fully what repercussions may come from their decisions.

In the dissenting opinion for Quinn v. United States, Justice Jackson disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold contempt of Congress convictions against individuals who refused to answer questions during a Congressional hearing. He argued that these individuals should have been protected by their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Justice Jackson believed that the Court was overstepping its bounds by allowing Congress to punish people for refusing to incriminate themselves, which he saw as an infringement on individual liberties and a violation of constitutional protections. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses of power if Congress were allowed unchecked authority in this area.