The United States v. Winstar Corporation case in 1995 revolved around the issue of whether the U.S government was liable for damages when it altered regulations that had encouraged savings and loan associations to purchase failing thrifts. In the early 1980s, several financial institutions including Winstar Corp., agreed to acquire struggling thrifts under a deal with federal regulators which allowed them to count goodwill towards regulatory capital requirements over an extended period. However, following a change in accounting rules by Congress through the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989, these benefits were rescinded causing significant losses for these acquiring institutions who subsequently sued for breach of contract. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Winstar Corp., holding that while Congress had authority to modify laws or contracts retroactively, it did not absolve the government from its responsibility if such changes resulted in financial damage to other parties involved.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Winstar Corporation case argued that the government should not be held liable for breaching contracts with thrifts during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. The justices believed that Congress, when it passed legislation to address this financial crisis, did not intend to bind future Congresses or taxpayers to cover losses incurred by these institutions due to changes in regulatory accounting rules. They also contended that there was no explicit contractual guarantee from regulators promising specific treatment under new laws or regulations. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's view that a contract had been breached because such an agreement would have required clear and unequivocal language indicating this commitment which was absent here.