In the case of Conners v. United States (1900), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Alaska. The plaintiff, Conners, claimed that he had purchased Alaskan land from Native Americans prior to its purchase by the United States and argued that his claim should be recognized under international law principles respecting pre-existing property rights at the time of territorial acquisition. However, it was determined by lower courts and affirmed by the Supreme Court that there was no legal basis for this claim as Congress had not passed any legislation recognizing such purchases from Native Americans in Alaska. Furthermore, it was noted that even if such laws existed they would likely have required federal government approval for these transactions which did not occur in this instance.

In the dissenting opinion for Conners v. United States, the justice argued that there was a lack of sufficient evidence to support the conviction of Mr. Conners under conspiracy charges. The dissent emphasized that mere association or knowledge of criminal activity is not enough to establish guilt in a conspiracy charge; rather, it requires proof of an agreement between two or more persons with intent to commit an unlawful act. In this case, while Mr. Conners may have been aware and involved in some way with those committing mail frauds, there was no concrete evidence showing he had agreed or conspired with them to do so. Therefore, his conviction should be overturned due to insufficient evidence proving beyond reasonable doubt his participation in a conspiracy plot.