The Fisher v. Baker case in 1906 involved a dispute over land ownership in the territory of Oklahoma. The plaintiff, Fisher, acting on behalf of Barcelon, claimed that he had rightfully purchased the land from an individual who had won it through a lottery conducted by the government to distribute surplus lands among settlers. However, Baker contested this claim arguing that he was actually occupying and cultivating the land before it was put up for lottery and hence should be considered its rightful owner under existing homesteading laws. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Baker stating that his occupancy and cultivation prior to any official survey or allotment made him eligible for preemption rights under federal law which superseded any subsequent claims based on purchase or lottery win.

In the dissenting opinion for Fisher, on behalf of Barcelon, v. Baker (1906), Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and principles of justice. He contended that a person should not be deprived of their property without due process and fair compensation, as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. In this case, he believed that Mr. Barcelon had been unjustly denied his rightful claim to land in California because he did not have sufficient notice or opportunity to defend his interests before it was sold at auction by government authorities who were settling Spanish land grants from before California became part of the United States. Furthermore, Justice Harlan criticized how lower courts handled evidence in this case and suggested they may have unfairly favored certain parties over others during proceedings.