In the United States Ex Rel. Ness v. Fisher case of 1911, the Supreme Court dealt with an issue related to immigration law and deportation proceedings. The petitioner, Mr. Ness, was a Norwegian immigrant who had been ordered for deportation due to his involvement in criminal activities that violated U.S immigration laws - specifically crimes involving moral turpitude committed within five years of entry into the country and sentenced to imprisonment for one year or more. He challenged this order arguing that he should not be deported because his crime did not meet these criteria as it was neither a felony nor infamous crime under Pennsylvania state law where he resided. The Supreme Court rejected this argument stating that federal immigration laws were independent from state criminal classifications; therefore, whether or not his crime constituted a felony under Pennsylvania law was irrelevant for purposes of federal immigration enforcement actions such as deportation orders. The court further clarified that "moral turpitude" is determined by standards set forth in federal statutes rather than individual states' definitions of felonies or misdemeanors which may vary widely across jurisdictions. This ruling affirmed the authority of Federal Immigration Law over State Criminal Law when determining deportability based on specific types of crimes committed by immigrants.

In the dissenting opinion for United States ex rel. Ness v. Fisher, it was argued that the court had erred in its interpretation of immigration law and overstepped its jurisdiction by intervening in administrative decisions related to deportation orders. The dissenting justices believed that the Secretary of Commerce and Labor should have final authority on such matters as provided under existing legislation, without interference from judicial bodies unless there is a clear violation of constitutional rights or procedural due process. They contended that Ness's case did not meet these criteria since he was given ample opportunity to present his defense before an immigration board which found him guilty based on substantial evidence presented against him. Therefore, they opined that Ness's deportation order should stand as issued by the Secretary.