Felton v. United States was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a federal court had the power to issue an injunction against a state officer. The case arose when the United States sought to enjoin a state officer from collecting taxes on certain federal lands. The Supreme Court held that the federal court had the power to issue such an injunction. The case began when the United States brought suit against the state of Georgia and its tax collector, William Felton, to enjoin him from collecting taxes on certain federal lands. The United States argued that the federal government had exclusive jurisdiction over the lands and that the state had no authority to tax them. The Supreme Court agreed, holding that the federal court had the power to issue an injunction against a state officer in order to protect the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. The Court reasoned that the federal government had the power to protect its exclusive jurisdiction over the lands, and that the state had no authority to interfere with that jurisdiction. The Court also noted that the federal government had the power to protect its citizens from state interference, and that the injunction was necessary to protect the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the federal court had the power to issue an injunction against a state officer in order to protect the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. The Court reasoned that the federal government had the power to protect its exclusive jurisdiction over the lands, and that the state had no authority to interfere with that jurisdiction. The Court also noted that the federal government had the power to protect its citizens from state interference, and that the injunction was necessary to protect the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Felton v. United States, arguing that the majority's decision was incorrect and should be reversed. He argued that Congress had no authority to pass a law prohibiting citizens from bringing suits against the government for damages caused by its officers or agents acting within their official capacity. The Constitution does not grant such power to Congress, nor has it been delegated by any of the states; thus, he concluded that this law is unconstitutional and void. Furthermore, Justice Field noted that if Congress were allowed to pass laws like this one which prohibit citizens from seeking redress for wrongs committed by federal officials then there would be no way for individuals to protect themselves against abuse of power on behalf of those in positions of authority over them. As such, he maintained that allowing this law would lead to an unjust situation where people are unable to seek justice when they have been wronged due solely because they cannot bring suit against those responsible - namely government officials who act under color of office but without legal justification or authorization.