In the 1892 case of Indiana v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over land ownership between the state of Indiana and the federal government. The conflict arose when Indiana claimed that it owned certain lands under Lake Michigan, which were being used by the federal government for a harbor improvement project in Chicago. The court held that these submerged lands belonged to Illinois at its admission into Union and not to neighboring states like Indiana or Wisconsin because they were within its boundaries as defined by Congress in 1818 Act admitting Illinois into Union. Therefore, any rights over this territory would have been vested with Illinois rather than other states or individuals unless explicitly stated otherwise by Congress itself.

In the dissenting opinion for Indiana v. United States, 1892, Justice Brewer argued that the state of Indiana had a valid claim to ownership over certain lands submerged under Lake Michigan. He contended that when Indiana was admitted into the Union in 1816, it gained all rights and privileges enjoyed by other states - including sovereignty over its land and waters. This included any lands beneath navigable waters within its borders. The majority's decision effectively stripped away these rights from not only Indiana but also potentially every other state bordering similar bodies of water. Brewer believed this ruling contradicted established principles of public law regarding a state's dominion over its own territory upon entering the Union on equal footing with existing states.