In the Bausman v. Dixon case of 1898, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Washington state. The plaintiff, Bausman, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who received it through inheritance from his father's estate. However, Dixon contested this claim by arguing that the original owner did not have legal rights to transfer or sell the property because it was part of a military reservation at Fort Townsend and therefore belonged to the federal government. The court ruled in favor of Dixon on grounds that under federal law any attempt to pre-emptively claim public lands for private use without explicit authorization is invalid; hence all subsequent transactions involving such properties are also voided as they were based on an initial illegal act.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Bausman v. Dixon argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Washington state law prohibiting Chinese immigrants from owning land was fundamentally flawed. The dissenting justices believed that this ruling contradicted previous Supreme Court decisions which had established that states could not discriminate against foreign nationals when it came to property rights, particularly if those individuals were living legally within U.S borders. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how the court interpreted treaties between China and America, arguing these should protect Chinese residents' right to own land just as they protected other civil liberties. Furthermore, they contended that such discriminatory laws violated principles of equality under the Constitution and undermined America’s commitment to justice for all its inhabitants regardless of their race or nationality.