In the Bryar v. Campbell case of 1899, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in California. The plaintiff, Bryar, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had obtained it through preemption rights under federal law and subsequently received a patent for it from the United States government. However, Campbell contested this claim by arguing that he was entitled to possession based on his Mexican land grant which antedated Bryar's purchase and was confirmed by both state and federal courts before being patented by the United States government as well. The Supreme Court held that while both parties possessed valid patents issued by the U.S., priority should be given to Campbell due to his earlier confirmation date despite receiving his patent after Bryar did. This decision established precedence in cases where there are conflicting claims over public lands arising out of different laws or sources of title - priority is determined not necessarily by when one receives their patent but rather when their right originated.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Bryar v. Campbell, 1899, argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring liquor sellers to obtain a license was an overreach of federal power and infringed upon states' rights. The dissenting justices believed that this ruling interfered with individual liberties and economic freedoms by imposing unnecessary regulations on businesses. They also contended that it violated the Constitution's Commerce Clause by allowing federal regulation of intrastate commerce, which they saw as solely within the purview of state governments. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuses of power if such broad interpretations were allowed to stand unchallenged.