The United States brought a case against Ephraim Briggs, alleging that he had unlawfully sold liquor to Native Americans in violation of the Indian Intercourse Act. The Supreme Court found that the act was constitutional and applied to all persons within its jurisdiction, regardless of race or nationality. Furthermore, it held that Congress had authority over Indian affairs and could regulate trade with them as necessary for their protection. Additionally, the court determined that Briggs' actions were illegal because they violated both federal law and treaty obligations between the U.S. government and Native American tribes. Ultimately, this decision affirmed congressional power over tribal matters while also protecting vulnerable populations from exploitation by non-Indians through unlawful trading practices

In the case of The United States v. Ephraim Briggs, Justice McLean dissented from the majority opinion that held that a contract between two parties was valid even though it had not been approved by Congress as required under an act of 1820. He argued that this would lead to contracts being made without any legal authority and could potentially be used for fraudulent purposes. Furthermore, he noted that if such contracts were allowed to stand then they would set a dangerous precedent in which individuals could enter into agreements with impunity and without regard for federal law or regulations. In conclusion, Justice McLean believed that allowing these types of contracts to go forward unchecked would undermine the rule of law and create chaos within our society.