The United States v. Anthony Salerno et al., 1991, was a significant case that tested the constitutionality of pretrial detention under the Bail Reform Act of 1984. The defendants, including reputed organized crime figure Anthony "Fat Tony" Salerno, were indicted on racketeering charges and detained before trial due to their perceived danger to community safety. They challenged this detention as a violation of their Fifth Amendment right not to be punished without trial and their Eighth Amendment right against excessive bail. However, in a decision delivered by Chief Justice Rehnquist, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of pretrial detention for dangerous individuals under certain circumstances outlined in the Bail Reform Act - such as when there is clear evidence that no release conditions will reasonably assure public safety - stating it did not constitute punishment prior to conviction or violate constitutional rights.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Anthony Salerno, et al., Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that preventive detention as a regulatory measure to prevent crime was unconstitutional. He believed it violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Excessive Bail Clause of the Eighth Amendment. Marshall contended that liberty is a fundamental right, and any governmental deprivation must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. He disagreed with majority's view that government could detain an individual merely on prediction of future criminal conduct without violating constitutional rights. Furthermore, he criticized Congress' decision to allow pretrial detention based on potential danger posed by defendants as being too broad and vague in its definition of 'danger'. In his view, this allowed for arbitrary enforcement which threatened basic civil liberties.