In the case of Davis et al. v. Williford et al., the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Oklahoma, which was originally allotted to members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes under an agreement with the U.S government. The plaintiffs, heirs of original allottees, claimed that they were entitled to oil and gas royalties from this land based on their interpretation of certain provisions within these agreements. However, defendants argued that subsequent legislation had transferred mineral rights to them as surface owners. The court ruled in favor of defendants by interpreting that Congress intended for full property rights - including minerals beneath - to pass onto successive owners once restrictions on alienation were removed from tribal lands (which occurred after death or sale by original allottee). Therefore, it held that descendants could not claim special privileges over natural resources unless explicitly stated in law or treaty terms.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Davis et al. v. Williford et al., argued that the majority had erred in its interpretation and application of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause, which guarantees all citizens equal protection under law. The dissenters believed that this constitutional provision was intended to protect individuals from arbitrary state action, not to shield corporations from regulation aimed at protecting public health and welfare. They contended that a corporation does not have an inherent right to do business but is granted this privilege by the state under certain conditions, including compliance with reasonable regulations designed for public benefit. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's view that Arkansas' requirement for out-of-state insurance companies to maintain deposits within their borders as security against policyholder claims constituted an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce or violation of due process rights.