In the case of Cosgrove v. Winney, 1898, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Idaho. The plaintiff, Cosgrove, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had obtained it through preemption rights under federal law. However, the defendant Winney argued that he was actually the rightful owner because he had received a patent for this same land from the United States government after fulfilling all necessary requirements including residence and cultivation stipulated by Homestead laws. The court ruled in favor of Winney stating that once a patent has been issued by government authorities to an individual for any tract of public lands within its jurisdiction based on compliance with statutory conditions precedent such as those required under homesteading laws; it cannot be impeached or annulled at law or equity except on grounds like fraud or mistake which were not present here.

In the dissenting opinion for Cosgrove v. Winney, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring voters to pay a poll tax before voting was fundamentally unjust and unconstitutional. The dissenting justices contended that this law effectively disenfranchised poor citizens who could not afford to pay the tax, thereby violating their right to vote as guaranteed by the Constitution. They also maintained that such laws were discriminatory in nature, disproportionately affecting minority communities and further entrenching socio-economic disparities within society. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of 'privileges or immunities' under Fourteenth Amendment arguing it should include fundamental political rights like voting which cannot be abridged on account of poverty or race.