In Connell et al. v. Walker, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Oklahoma. The plaintiffs, Connell and others, claimed that they had purchased the land from an individual who had received it as part of an allotment under federal law designed to distribute lands to Native Americans. However, this law also included restrictions on alienation or sale of these lands for a certain period without approval from the Secretary of Interior. The defendant, Walker, argued that since there was no such approval when their predecessor sold the land to Connell's predecessor-in-interest; therefore making all subsequent transfers void including Connell’s claim on property. The court ruled in favor of Walker stating that even though Congress later removed those restrictions retroactively through another act but it did not validate any prior unauthorized conveyances made during restriction period which were considered absolutely null and void at time they were made.

In the dissenting opinion for Connell et al. v. Walker, the justice argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring all foreign corporations doing business in Texas to consent to being sued in any county where they do business was unconstitutional. The dissenting justice believed this law violated due process rights of these corporations under the Fourteenth Amendment by forcing them into potentially biased or prejudiced local courts without regard for their right to a fair trial. They also contended that it unfairly burdened interstate commerce and gave an unfair advantage to domestic companies over out-of-state ones, violating principles of equal protection under the Constitution as well as federal laws regulating commerce among states.