In the Buckstaff v. Russell case of 1893, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in Wisconsin. The plaintiff, Buckstaff, claimed that he had purchased certain lands from the state under an act of Congress passed in 1850 which granted swamp and overflowed lands to states for drainage purposes. However, these lands were later sold by the state to Russell who also claimed ownership based on his purchase agreement with Wisconsin officials. The court held that although Buckstaff was first to buy this land from the state government under federal law provisions, it did not guarantee him absolute rights over it because at that time those particular lands were not classified as 'swamp and overflowed'. Therefore they could have been legally sold again by state authorities without violating any laws or rights of previous buyers like Buckstaff. Thus ruling favored Russell's claim over disputed property.

In the dissenting opinion for Buckstaff v. Russell, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax assessment on property in Wisconsin was incorrect because it violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He contended that while states have broad powers to levy taxes, they must still respect constitutional protections and cannot arbitrarily assess property values without giving owners an opportunity to challenge them. In this case, he believed that Mr. Buckstaff had not been given adequate notice or opportunity to contest his tax assessment before it was finalized by local authorities. This failure constituted a violation of his right to due process as guaranteed by the Constitution according to Justice Brewer.