In the 1906 case of Ballard v. Hunter, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in California. The plaintiff, Ballard, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had obtained it through preemption rights under federal law. However, the defendant, Hunter argued that this was not valid as the original owner did not meet all necessary requirements for preemption and therefore could not legally sell it to Ballard. The lower court ruled in favor of Hunter but on appeal to the Supreme Court; they reversed this decision stating that once a patent has been issued by government officials and is uncontested for more than five years then its validity cannot be questioned even if there were irregularities or fraud involved in obtaining it initially.

In the dissenting opinion for Ballard v. Hunter, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was an overreach of federal power and a violation of state sovereignty. He contended that Congress did not have the authority to pass legislation affecting land titles in territories after they had become states, as it infringed upon their rights as sovereign entities within the Union. Furthermore, he believed that such actions could lead to uncertainty and instability in property law if retroactive changes could be made by Congressional action. In his view, once a territory became a state, its land titles should be beyond federal control unless explicitly provided for in its enabling act or constitution.