In the 1906 case United States v. Shipp, the U.S. Supreme Court was called upon to address a matter of contempt for its authority in relation to a lynching incident that occurred in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The victim of the lynching, Ed Johnson, had been convicted and sentenced to death for rape but his lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that he did not receive a fair trial due to racial prejudice. The court agreed and issued an order staying his execution pending review of his case; however Sheriff Joseph Shipp allowed a mob access into jail where they took Johnson out and killed him before this could happen. This led directly to charges being filed against Shipp by federal authorities who accused him of violating their order intentionally which is considered as contempt towards them if proven true. The Supreme Court found Shipp guilty after conducting its own investigation - marking it as one-of-a-kind since it's rare for SCOTUS itself rather than lower courts or special masters acting on their behalf doing so - thus asserting supremacy over state officials when enforcing constitutional rights even during times when public sentiment might be strongly against such enforcement efforts at local levels especially those related with race issues like this one was back then.

In the United States v. Shipp case of 1906, there was no dissenting opinion recorded as it was a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court. The court found Joseph Shipp and others guilty of contempt for their roles in facilitating a mob's lynching of Ed Johnson, an African American man who had been granted a stay of execution by the Supreme Court. This marked the first time that the Supreme Court held a criminal trial at its own bench and underscored its authority to protect defendants' constitutional rights even against local public sentiment or officials' actions.