In the United States v. Chambers et al., 1933, the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving an alleged violation of Prohibition laws. The defendants were charged with conspiracy to violate these laws by possessing and selling alcohol in Chicago, Illinois. They appealed their conviction arguing that evidence used against them was obtained through illegal search and seizure procedures which violated their Fourth Amendment rights. However, the Supreme Court upheld their convictions stating that there was no constitutional violation as federal agents had acted upon reliable information from an informant who had purchased liquor from one of the defendants' premises before obtaining a warrant for further searches and seizures. Hence, it concluded that this did not constitute unreasonable search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Chambers et al., Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision to uphold a federal law prohibiting transportation of stolen vehicles across state lines was an overreach of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause. He contended that this case involved theft, which is traditionally a matter of state jurisdiction, not interstate commerce. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuse and expansion of federal power if such broad interpretations were allowed to stand unchallenged. According to him, it would mean virtually any crime could be considered within federal jurisdiction as long as there was some tangential connection with interstate commerce - something he believed went beyond what framers intended when they drafted Constitution’s Commerce Clause.