In the United States v. Baruch case of 1911, the Supreme Court dealt with issues related to customs duties on imported goods. The defendant, Baruch, had imported diamonds into the U.S., which were classified by customs officials under a tariff act as "diamonds not set." This classification resulted in a higher duty than if they had been categorized as "diamonds suitable for use in the manufacture of jewelry," which was what Baruch argued for. The court ruled against him stating that it is not enough that an article may be used in manufacturing; it must be primarily intended and regularly or ordinarily so employed to fall within such description. Therefore, since these diamonds could also have other uses besides being used in jewelry making (like scientific purposes), they did not fit this category and thus attracted higher import duties.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Baruch case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction for conspiracy to defraud the government was erroneous because it relied on an overly broad interpretation of what constituted fraud. The dissenters contended that, while there may have been unethical behavior involved, this did not necessarily equate to illegal activity under existing laws and regulations. They believed that by expanding the definition of fraud so broadly, they were setting a dangerous precedent where any questionable business practice could potentially be prosecuted as criminal activity. This would create uncertainty within commercial sectors and potentially stifle legitimate business activities due to fear of legal repercussions.