In the 1971 case Zicarelli v. New Jersey State Commission of Investigation, John Zicarelli, a suspected organized crime member, was subpoenaed by the New Jersey State Commission of Investigation to testify about his activities. He refused on grounds that he might incriminate himself and was granted immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony. However, he continued to refuse to answer questions arguing that the immunity provided did not protect him from federal prosecution. The Supreme Court ruled against Zicarelli stating that while state-granted immunity does not prevent federal prosecutions per se, it does so if there is substantial evidence showing potential for such prosecutions based on compelled testimonies before state bodies. In this case however, no such threat existed hence compelling him to testify did not violate his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

In the dissenting opinion for Zicarelli v. New Jersey State Commission of Investigation, Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision violated the petitioner's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. He contended that compelling Zicarelli to testify before a state commission under threat of contempt charges was unconstitutional because it forced him to incriminate himself in ongoing federal investigations and potential prosecutions. Douglas also disagreed with the majority's view that immunity from prosecution in New Jersey would sufficiently protect Zicarelli’s constitutional rights, as this did not prevent possible prosecution at a federal level or by other states based on his testimony. The justice expressed concern about eroding individual liberties and protections provided by the Constitution through such rulings.