In the case of Cosmopolitan Mining Company v. Walsh in 1903, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving mining rights and property ownership. The Cosmopolitan Mining Company claimed that it had purchased land from an individual who was not aware that he owned valuable mineral deposits beneath his property's surface. When these minerals were discovered, another party, Walsh, asserted their right to mine them based on a pre-existing lease agreement with the original owner. The court decided in favor of Walsh, upholding his mining rights under the lease agreement despite the subsequent sale of land to Cosmopolitan Mining Company. This ruling affirmed that mineral rights can be separated from surface property rights and transferred independently.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Cosmopolitan Mining Company v. Walsh, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state tax on ore mined within its borders violated principles of federalism and property rights. The dissent contended that once minerals are extracted from land owned by a mining company, they become personal property and should not be subject to additional taxation by the state. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how different types of property were being taxed under this law, which they believed demonstrated unfairness and arbitrariness in its application. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of previous court decisions related to similar issues, arguing these cases did not establish precedent for such an expansive view of states' taxing powers over natural resources extraction activities.