Barnitz's Lessee v. Robert Casey was a Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States. The dispute arose when Barnitz, who had leased land from Pennsylvania, sued Casey for trespass and ejectment after he refused to vacate the property upon expiration of his lease. In its decision, the court held that state laws could not be enforced if they were found to conflict with federal law or treaties made by Congress under Article VI of the Constitution. This ruling set an important precedent for future cases involving conflicts between state and federal law as it affirmed that courts have authority to interpret constitutional provisions and determine their validity in relation to other laws or regulations. Furthermore, this case also established judicial review as a power vested in all levels of American courts; thus allowing them greater autonomy over legal matters within their jurisdiction while ensuring compliance with higher-level legislation such as those passed by Congress or ratified through treaty agreements.

In Barnitz's Lessee v. Robert Casey, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a deed of trust created by an individual in Pennsylvania prior to the adoption of its Constitution could be enforced after it had been adopted. The majority opinion held that such deeds were not enforceable because they violated public policy and constituted fraud against creditors. However, Justice Story dissented from this ruling on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there was no evidence to suggest that these trusts were intended as fraudulent devices; secondly, he maintained that if the trusts did violate public policy then it should have been up to state legislatures rather than courts to decide how best to address them. Ultimately, Story concluded that since there was no clear legal precedent for invalidating such trusts under Pennsylvania law at the time they were made - and since doing so would retroactively deprive individuals of their property rights - then they ought still be considered valid contracts which must be honored by all parties involved.