In the United States v. Hewecker case of 1896, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving maritime law and insurance fraud. The defendant, Mr. Hewecker, was accused of intentionally sinking his own ship to collect insurance money - an act known as barratry. He appealed his conviction arguing that under international maritime law, barratry could only be committed by a ship's crew or captain and not its owner. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation and upheld his conviction stating that anyone who deliberately sinks their own vessel for fraudulent purposes can be guilty of barratry regardless if they are part of the crew or not.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Hewecker case argued that the defendant should not be held accountable for his actions because he was acting under orders from a superior officer. The justice believed that it was unfair to punish an individual who was merely following instructions, especially when those instructions came from someone with authority within the military structure. He also pointed out that there were no clear guidelines or laws at the time which would have informed Hewecker of any potential wrongdoing on his part. Therefore, punishing him retrospectively seemed unjust and arbitrary according to this view.