In the United States v. Wesley L. Sischo case of 1922, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter related to federal income tax law and its application to an individual's personal earnings from labor or services rendered. The defendant, Wesley L. Sischo, was charged with willfully failing to file an income tax return for the year 1917 as required by law at that time under Section 253 of Revenue Act of September 8th, 1916 and Section 1303(a) Revised Statutes (Comp St §5821). He argued that his earnings were not taxable because they resulted from his own personal efforts rather than any form of investment or property ownership. The court rejected this argument stating that there is no constitutional barrier preventing Congress from taxing incomes derived solely from one’s own labor or services provided in their profession; it does not infringe upon anyone's right to contract freely for their labor nor deprive them without due process of law under Fifth Amendment rights. This ruling affirmed that all forms of earned income are subject to taxation under U.S federal laws regardless if they come directly through wages/salaries resulting purely out person’s professional work.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Wesley L. Sischo, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., joined by Justice Louis Brandeis, disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold Sischo's conviction under a federal statute that criminalized false statements about receiving military decorations. The dissent argued that this law violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and was overly broad in its application. They contended that not all lies should be punishable by law unless they cause significant harm or are made with fraudulent intent. In their view, while lying about military honors is reprehensible, it does not necessarily result in tangible harm sufficient to justify criminal punishment under this specific statute.