In the United States v. Edward G. Scheffer case of 1997, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a military rule prohibiting defendants from using polygraph evidence in their defense did not violate their constitutional rights. The defendant, Airman First Class Edward G. Scheffer was charged with using methamphetamine while serving in the Air Force and wanted to introduce a polygraph test as part of his defense strategy to prove his innocence but was denied due to Military Rule of Evidence 707 which prohibits such use. He appealed on grounds that this prohibition violated his Sixth Amendment right "to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor." However, the Supreme Court upheld an 8-1 decision stating that banning polygraph results does not infringe upon a defendant's rights because these tests are unreliable and could potentially mislead juries.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Edward G. Scheffer, Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to uphold a blanket ban on polygraph evidence was an overreach and infringed upon defendants' rights to present a defense. He contended that while there may be concerns about the reliability of polygraphs, it should be up to individual judges in each case to decide whether or not such evidence is admissible based on its relevance and credibility rather than imposing a universal prohibition. Furthermore, he pointed out that other forms of potentially unreliable evidence are allowed in court under certain circumstances, making the exclusion of polygraph results inconsistent with existing rules of evidence.