In the case of United States v. Wigger, alias Moose Joh in 1914, the defendant was charged with smuggling and selling opium. The Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained through a warrantless search could be used in federal court because it did not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. This ruling came about due to an exception known as "border search," which allows for warrantless searches at international borders or their functional equivalent (like international airports). In this case, customs officials had found opium hidden inside imported merchandise without a warrant but within their jurisdiction at an entry port. Therefore, even though there was no probable cause or suspicion of criminal activity when they opened the package containing opium, since it happened within border control areas where routine inspections are expected and permissible under law enforcement duties related to immigration and importation control activities; hence such inspection didn't infringe upon any constitutional rights of privacy.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Wigger case argued that the defendant, a non-citizen who had lived in Alaska for many years and was convicted of selling liquor to Native Alaskans, should not have been prosecuted under federal law. The dissent contended that because Alaska was not officially a state at the time of Wigger's alleged crime, it did not fall under U.S. jurisdiction as defined by the relevant statute - which specifically referred to "Indian country." They further argued that even if Alaska were considered part of Indian country, there was no evidence presented at trial proving beyond reasonable doubt that Wigger knew he was selling alcohol within such territory or to an 'Indian,' both necessary elements for conviction under this specific law. Therefore, they believed his conviction should be overturned on these grounds.