The United States v. Kirkpatrick and Others was a Supreme Court case in which the defendants were charged with violating the Non-Intercourse Act of 1809, which prohibited trade between the United States and foreign nations without congressional authorization. The defendants argued that they had acted under orders from their superior officers, who had been authorized by President Madison to engage in such trade. The Supreme Court held that while it is true that military personnel are bound to obey lawful orders from their superiors, those orders must be consistent with existing laws; thus, any order issued by President Madison authorizing illegal trading activities would not be binding on members of the military. Furthermore, since Congress alone has authority over international commerce matters like this one, no executive branch official can issue an order overriding Congressional legislation without express permission from Congress itself.

In the case of The United States v. Kirkpatrick and Others, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a certain act of Congress was constitutional or not. The majority opinion held that it was indeed constitutional, but Justice Johnson dissented from this ruling. He argued that Congress had exceeded its authority by passing an act which allowed for citizens to be tried in federal court for crimes committed within their own state boundaries; he believed such matters should remain under the jurisdiction of state courts only. Additionally, Johnson asserted that since no provision existed in either the Constitution or any other law granting Congress power over these types of cases, they could not pass legislation on them without violating both due process and separation-of-powers principles established by our nation's founding fathers. In conclusion, Justice Johnson maintained his belief that states should retain exclusive control over criminal trials occurring within their borders unless otherwise provided for by law or amendment to the Constitution itself.