In the case of Johanson v. Washington in 1902, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership. The plaintiff, Johanson, was an immigrant who had purchased public land from the state of Washington under a law that allowed immigrants to buy and own property. However, after purchasing the land he returned to his home country without becoming a naturalized citizen or establishing residency in America. Later on, when he tried to sell this property it was discovered that according to federal law at that time only American citizens could purchase public lands from states which led him being sued by another party claiming rightful ownership over said lands. The court ruled against Johanson stating that although state laws permitted non-citizens like him to purchase and hold real estate properties within their jurisdiction; they did not have authority over federal laws governing sale of public lands which clearly stated such transactions were exclusive for US citizens only thus making his initial acquisition invalid. This decision highlighted supremacy clause where Federal Law takes precedence over State Law if there is any conflict between them and also emphasized importance of citizenship status while dealing with matters related with national resources like public lands.

The dissenting opinion in the Johanson v. Washington case argued that the majority's decision violated the defendant's constitutional rights, particularly his right to a fair trial and due process of law. The dissenting justices believed that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to support a conviction, and thus it was unjust for Mr. Johanson to be found guilty based on such scanty proof. They also disagreed with how the court handled certain procedural aspects of this case, arguing that these missteps further undermined Mr. Johanson’s ability to defend himself effectively against the charges brought against him by Washington state authorities.