In the 1948 case Stemmer v. New York, the United States Supreme Court upheld a lower court's decision that denied a petition for habeas corpus filed by Joseph Stemmer. Stemmer was convicted in New York state courts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. He appealed his conviction on grounds that he had been denied due process because he was not provided with counsel during police interrogation, which led to self-incriminating statements used against him at trial. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating that while it is essential for defendants to have legal representation during trial proceedings under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, this requirement does not extend to pre-trial interrogations or investigations conducted by law enforcement officers outside of courtrooms.

The dissenting opinion in Stemmer v. New York argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction for criminal libel was inconsistent with First Amendment protections of free speech and press. The dissent contended that the state law under which the defendant was convicted allowed punishment for truthful statements made with good motives, thus infringing upon constitutional rights. It further asserted that this case presented an opportunity to clarify whether or not states could punish truth-telling as libelous, even if it is done without malice or harmful intent. The dissent also criticized the majority's reliance on historical common-law principles of defamation, arguing they were outdated and incompatible with modern understandings of free expression rights.