In the 1928 case of The Okanogan, Methow, San Poelis (or San Poil), Nespelem, Colville, and Lake Indian Tribes or Bands of the State of Washington v. United States - also known as "The Pocket Veto Case" - several Native American tribes sued the U.S. government over a land dispute. Congress had passed an act authorizing these tribes to file suit against the U.S., but President Calvin Coolidge pocket vetoed it by not signing it within ten days while Congress was adjourned. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S., stating that even though there were no explicit constitutional provisions for such a situation, historical precedent supported this use of presidential power when Congress is not in session to override vetoes.

In the dissenting opinion for The Pocket Veto Case, it was argued that the President's power to "pocket veto" a bill - i.e., to effectively veto it by simply not signing it within ten days of receiving it (excluding Sundays) when Congress is not in session - should be limited. The dissenters believed that this power should only apply when Congress adjourns sine die (without setting a date for its next meeting), rather than whenever there is an intra-session recess. They contended that such an interpretation would better reflect the Constitution's balance of powers between branches and respect for legislative authority. Furthermore, they pointed out potential abuses if every brief recess could trigger pocket vetoes, which unlike regular vetoes cannot be overridden by Congress.