The Experiment was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1823. The case involved a dispute between two parties over ownership of a ship called the Experiment, which had been seized during an illegal voyage to Africa. The defendant argued that he had purchased the vessel from its original owner and thus held title to it, while the plaintiff claimed that they were entitled to possession because they had paid for repairs made on behalf of the original owner prior to his sale of it. In its decision, the court found in favor of plaintiff, holding that their payment for repairs gave them superior rights over any other claimant and thus allowed them rightful possession of the vessel. This ruling established precedent regarding maritime law concerning claims involving vessels with multiple owners or claimants who have all contributed something towards its upkeep or repair costs.

In The Experiment, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced even though it violated an existing law. In a 5-4 decision, the majority held that such contracts were not enforceable and thus dismissed the case. Justice Johnson wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that while laws should generally be respected and followed, there are times when they can justly be disregarded. He reasoned that if both parties had entered into their agreement with full knowledge of its illegality then it would have been unfair for one party to benefit from breaking the law while leaving another party without recourse or compensation. Furthermore, he noted that enforcing these types of agreements would help promote fairness by preventing individuals from taking advantage of each other's ignorance or lack of legal resources. Ultimately, Johnson concluded that although courts should strive to uphold laws whenever possible, they must also recognize when those laws create unjust results and take steps to remedy them accordingly.