The Star of Hope was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1873. The case involved a dispute between the owners of a ship, the Star of Hope, and the United States government. The government had seized the ship for alleged violations of the Neutrality Act of 1794. The owners of the ship argued that the seizure was unlawful because the Neutrality Act did not apply to the situation. The Supreme Court held that the Neutrality Act did not apply to the situation and that the seizure was unlawful. The Court reasoned that the Neutrality Act was intended to prevent the United States from becoming involved in foreign wars and did not apply to the situation at hand. The Court also held that the government had failed to provide sufficient evidence to support its claim that the ship had violated the Neutrality Act. The Court concluded that the seizure of the Star of Hope was unlawful and ordered the government to return the ship to its owners. The Court also ordered the government to pay damages to the owners for the unlawful seizure. This case established the principle that the government must provide sufficient evidence to support its claims in order to lawfully seize a vessel.

In The Star of Hope, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a ship that had been seized by Confederate forces during the Civil War could be considered an enemy vessel. In a 5-4 decision, the majority held that it could not because it had been registered in New York before hostilities began and therefore did not fall under the definition of an enemy vessel. Justice Field dissented from this opinion on two grounds: first, he argued that registration alone should not determine whether or not a vessel is considered an enemy; second, he asserted that Congress' intent when passing legislation related to war vessels should be given greater weight than state registration laws. He concluded his dissent by stating "the power over war vessels must necessarily rest with Congress."