The U.S. Supreme Court case County of Oneida, New York, et al. v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State et al., 1984 dealt with the issue of land rights and compensation for lands taken from the Oneida Indian Nation in violation of federal law in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The court ruled that there was no statute of limitations on tribal claims to ancestral lands illegally seized by states or private citizens, thus allowing tribes to sue for damages even if they could not regain possession of their former territories. However, it also held that while Federal Courts have jurisdiction over such cases under federal common law, any relief awarded must be consistent with federal policy towards Native Americans as expressed through Congressional legislation.

In the dissenting opinion for County of Oneida, New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State et al., Justice John Paul Stevens argued that the majority's decision to allow the tribe to sue for damages was flawed. He contended that while it is true that a violation of federal law occurred when land was taken from the tribe in 1795 without congressional approval, this does not necessarily mean they are entitled to monetary compensation two centuries later. He pointed out that there were no legal remedies available at the time and questioned whether it is appropriate or feasible now to provide one retroactively. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential implications on other cases involving historic injustices if such retrospective remedies were allowed.