In the case of Wallace v. United States in 1921, the Supreme Court ruled on an issue related to tax evasion and fraud. The defendant, John T. Wallace was accused of conspiring to defraud the government by evading taxes through a series of transactions involving whiskey distilleries during Prohibition era. He appealed his conviction arguing that he had been charged under an incorrect statute - one which dealt with conspiracy to commit offense or defraud US, instead of specific provisions dealing with internal revenue laws. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction stating that it was not necessary for charges to be filed under specific statutes if they could also fall within broader ones encompassing various offenses against the US government as long as there is no ambiguity about what constitutes crime and punishment therein. This ruling affirmed that individuals can be prosecuted for general conspiracy against U.S., even when their actions might also violate more specific laws; thus reinforcing federal authority in prosecuting criminal conspiracies aimed at defrauding or committing offenses against U.S Government.

In the dissenting opinion for Wallace v. United States, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold Wallace's conviction on charges of conspiracy to defraud the government by obstructing its functions. He argued that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wallace had knowingly and willfully conspired to commit fraud. Furthermore, he contended that even if such a conspiracy existed, it did not necessarily follow that this would have resulted in an obstruction of governmental function as required under the applicable statute. Therefore, he believed that upholding Wallace's conviction based on these grounds constituted a misinterpretation and misuse of law which could set dangerous precedents for future cases involving similar charges.