Withenbury v. United States was a Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether or not an individual could be convicted for refusing to answer questions posed by Congress during a hearing. The petitioner, Withenbury, had been called before Congress and refused to answer certain questions on the grounds that they were irrelevant and immaterial to the inquiry at hand. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the United States, finding that Withenbury's refusal constituted contempt of Congress and therefore he could be held liable for his actions. This ruling established precedent which allowed Congressional committees greater power when conducting investigations as it gave them authority over those who refuse to cooperate with their inquiries.

In Witherbury v. United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a conviction for perjury could be based on an answer that was literally true but misleading due to omissions or other circumstances. The majority opinion held that such a conviction was permissible under certain conditions, while Justice Field dissented from this ruling. He argued that in order for someone to be convicted of perjury they must have made false statements with intent to deceive and not simply because their answers were incomplete or misleading. Furthermore, he asserted that allowing convictions based on literal truth but deceptive answers would lead prosecutors down a slippery slope of convicting people who had not actually lied about anything material and thus should not be punished as if they had committed perjury.