In the case of Lassen v. Arizona ex rel. Arizona Highway Department in 1966, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with resolving a dispute over land ownership between the State Land Commissioner and the state's Highway Department. The issue arose from an ambiguity in a federal law that granted certain lands to new states upon their admission into the Union but reserved other lands for federal purposes such as highways. The court held that when there is conflict between state and federal interests regarding these lands, it should be resolved in favor of national policy rather than local interest. Therefore, if any portion of this federally-granted land was needed for highway construction under another provision of federal law, then those needs would take precedence over any claim by a state or its subdivisions.

In the dissenting opinion for LASSEN v. ARIZONA ex rel. ARIZONA HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT, Justice Black disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Arizona's Enabling Act and its application to this case. He argued that the act did not intend to limit Arizona’s ability to use public lands for any purpose it deemed beneficial, including highway construction. The language in Section 28 of the Act was meant only as a safeguard against land disposal without compensation rather than an outright prohibition on using these lands for non-revenue generating purposes like highways or schools. Furthermore, he contended that if Congress had intended such strict limitations on land use, they would have explicitly stated so within the legislation itself.