In the 1897 case Selvester v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a person could not be tried for perjury if they were compelled to testify against themselves in court. The defendant, Selvester, was charged with perjury after giving false testimony during his own trial for embezzlement. He argued that he should have been protected by the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination and therefore could not be prosecuted for perjury based on his own testimony at trial. The Supreme Court agreed with Selvester’s argument and held that compelling a defendant to testify under threat of punishment would violate their constitutional rights as it would force them into a position where they must either incriminate themselves or commit perjury - both punishable offenses. This ruling reinforced the principle of protection from self-incrimination enshrined in American law through the Fifth Amendment and clarified its application in cases where defendants are called upon to give testimonies.

In the dissenting opinion for Selvester v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's interpretation of a statute regarding naturalization was incorrect. He believed that Congress intended to allow immigrants who had declared their intention to become citizens and lived in the U.S. for five years prior to 1892 (when an amendment requiring additional residency was passed) to be eligible for citizenship without further delay, even if they did not file their final papers until after 1892. The majority held otherwise, ruling that these individuals needed another year of residence following their declaration of intent before they could apply for citizenship due to the new law's requirements. Justice Brewer contended this decision unfairly penalized those who were already on track towards becoming citizens when the law changed by extending their waiting period unnecessarily.