In the United States v. White case of 1943, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving income tax evasion. The defendant, White, had been convicted for willfully attempting to evade and defeat his income taxes by filing false and fraudulent returns. He appealed this conviction arguing that he was not given an opportunity to cross-examine one of the government's witnesses who had died before trial but whose testimony from a previous trial was used against him in court. The Supreme Court upheld White’s conviction with a 6-2 majority vote (one justice did not participate). They concluded that while it is generally true that defendants have the right to confront their accusers under the Sixth Amendment, there are exceptions when prior recorded testimonies can be admitted as evidence if they bear "indicia of reliability". In this case, since White had previously cross-examined this witness at another proceeding where he was represented by counsel and had similar motive to develop testimony about same facts, it met these criteria.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. White, Justice Murphy argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through warrantless wiretapping was unconstitutional. He contended that such practices violated an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Furthermore, he believed it also infringed upon their Fifth Amendment rights by compelling them to be witnesses against themselves in criminal cases. Murphy emphasized his belief that privacy is fundamental to a free society and should not be compromised without due process of law under any circumstances, including during times of war or national emergency as was the case at this time (World War II). He warned about potential abuses of power if government surveillance were allowed unchecked discretion and stressed the importance of judicial oversight in maintaining civil liberties.