In Laird v. Nelms, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1971 that the federal government was not liable for damages caused by sonic booms produced by military aircraft flying over private property. The plaintiffs, residents of a Tennessee town, had sued for compensation after their homes were damaged by repeated sonic booms from nearby Air Force training exercises. They argued that these constituted an unconstitutional taking of property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. However, the court disagreed and held that while there may have been damage to properties due to noise pollution from supersonic flights conducted as part of national defense activities, this did not constitute a 'taking' in constitutional terms because it wasn't a direct appropriation or invasion of property but rather consequential damages resulting from authorized governmental activity. The ruling effectively shielded the government from liability claims arising out of similar circumstances where its actions indirectly cause harm or damage to private properties during lawful operations.

In the dissenting opinion for Laird v. Nelms, Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold sovereign immunity in this case was a misinterpretation of precedent and an overreach of judicial power. He contended that previous cases had established exceptions to sovereign immunity when government actions caused direct harm or property damage, as with the sonic booms from military jets in this case. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's reliance on discretionary function exception which shields federal agencies from liability if their conduct involves discretion or policy-making decisions. He believed it should not apply here because operating aircrafts at low altitudes causing damages is hardly a matter of policy but rather operational routine subject to negligence laws like any private party would be held accountable for.