In the case of Whitney v. Dick, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1905 ruled on a dispute involving extradition and tribal sovereignty rights. The petitioner, Whitney, was the warden of Idaho State Penitentiary where Charles Dick, a member of an Indian tribe living within reservation boundaries in Idaho, had been imprisoned for larceny committed off-reservation against another tribal member. The governor of Washington sought to extradite him to face charges there for murder committed on an Indian reservation in that state before his arrest and conviction in Idaho. The court held that under federal law at the time (the Act of July 4th 1884), crimes by Indians against other Indians were subject only to punishment by their own tribes unless Congress explicitly provided otherwise; therefore Washington lacked jurisdiction over Dick's alleged crime since it occurred on a reservation between two members of an Indian tribe. Furthermore, because he was already serving prison time when Washington requested his extradition - which is not grounds for release from custody - he could not be extradited until after completing his sentence in Idaho.

In the dissenting opinion for Whitney v. Dick, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting cohabitation with more than one woman was an infringement on religious liberty. He contended that while bigamy could be criminalized due to its potential harm to society, mere cohabitation did not pose such a threat and should therefore be protected under the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion. Harlan also criticized the majority for their broad interpretation of "marriage," arguing that it went beyond what was necessary to protect societal interests and instead infringed upon individual rights. He further expressed concern about states' ability to regulate personal relationships in this manner without clear evidence of harm or danger posed by those relationships.