In the case of White et al. v. United States in 1938, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning federal income tax law and its application to shareholders of dissolved corporations. The petitioners were former stockholders who had received assets from their corporation upon dissolution but did not report these as taxable income, arguing that they were merely retrieving their own capital investment rather than receiving dividends or profits subject to taxation. However, the government argued that this was essentially liquidating dividend distribution and should be taxed accordingly. The Supreme Court sided with the government's interpretation of tax law, ruling that when a corporation is liquidated and its assets are distributed among shareholders, those distributions are considered taxable income for those shareholders under federal law - even if it results in loss for some investors due to depreciation in value since initial investment. This decision clarified how corporate dissolutions should be treated under U.S tax code.

In the dissenting opinion for White et al. v. United States, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through wiretapping. He argued that this violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures as well as Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. He believed that allowing such practices would lead to an erosion of civil liberties, stating "The tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the country... is to obtain convictions by means of unlawful seizures." Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses if law enforcement were allowed unrestricted use of wiretaps without any legal oversight or regulation in place.