United States v. Le Bris was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a foreign vessel that had been seized by the United States for violating the Neutrality Act of 1794 could be sold by the United States. The Neutrality Act prohibited vessels from engaging in hostilities against a foreign nation with whom the United States was at peace. The Supreme Court held that the United States had the right to seize and sell the vessel, as it had violated the Neutrality Act. The Court reasoned that the Neutrality Act was a valid exercise of Congress' power to regulate foreign commerce, and that the seizure and sale of the vessel was a valid exercise of the President's power to enforce the law. The Court also held that the vessel was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and that the United States had the right to seize and sell it. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the United States had the right to seize and sell the vessel, as it had violated the Neutrality Act. The Court reasoned that the Neutrality Act was a valid exercise of Congress' power to regulate foreign commerce, and that the seizure and sale of the vessel was a valid exercise of the President's power to enforce the law.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in United States v. Le Bris, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to both precedent and reason. He argued that a vessel is not subject to seizure for any violation of law committed by its master or crew while it is within foreign waters, as long as it does not enter into American jurisdiction without permission from Congress. The majority had held otherwise, allowing for such seizures if they were made with due process of law and under authority granted by Congress. Justice Field disagreed with this interpretation on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there was no evidence in either statute or common law which supported such an interpretation; secondly, he noted that previous cases had established a clear distinction between vessels operating within foreign waters and those entering American jurisdiction without permission from Congress - only the latter could be seized lawfully according to existing precedent. In conclusion, Justice Field maintained his position that vessels should not be subject to seizure when operating outside of U.S territorial limits unless authorized by Congress beforehand