In the United States v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp., 1970, the Supreme Court ruled that a company could be held criminally liable for shipping sulfuric acid without following safety regulations even if they were unaware of those regulations. The case arose when International Minerals and Chemical Corporation shipped sulfuric acid interstate but failed to follow packaging requirements outlined by federal law. They argued that they didn't know about these specific rules and thus couldn't be held responsible for violating them - essentially pleading ignorance of the law as their defense. However, in its decision, the Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling stating "ignorance of the law is no excuse," asserting that certain regulatory statutes imposing penalties are not subject to traditional mens rea (knowledge or intent) standards common in criminal laws because such regulatory measures serve public welfare by promoting safety.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp., Justice Black argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of statutory interpretation, which require clarity in criminal statutes. He contended that the statute at issue did not clearly state whether it applied to common carriers like IMC and therefore should be interpreted narrowly in favor of the defendant. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's reliance on legislative history to interpret an ambiguous statute, arguing that this approach undermines legal certainty and predictability by allowing courts to speculate about Congressional intent rather than relying on clear statutory language. Finally, he expressed concern that expanding federal regulatory power could lead to overcriminalization and excessive punishment for minor offenses.