In the case of Leiter et al., Trustees v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over land ownership in Louisiana. The Leiters claimed that they had acquired title to certain lands through purchase from private parties who held valid Spanish and French grants. However, these lands were also claimed by the U.S government under an act of Congress which declared them public property due to their location within confirmed boundaries of a grant made by Spain to Baron de Carondelet in 1797. The court found that there was no evidence proving that any part of this tract ever belonged or was granted by France or Spain to anyone other than Baron de Carondelet; thus it remained as public domain after being ceded back to the U.S in 1803 with Louisiana Purchase Treaty. Therefore, all subsequent claims derived from alleged previous private owners were invalid against United States' superior title based on its sovereignty rights received via international treaty.

In the dissenting opinion for Leiter et al., Trustees v. United States, Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision to allow the federal government to seize private property without compensation was a dangerous precedent that violated fundamental principles of justice and fairness. He contended that such an action should only be permissible in cases of extreme necessity or imminent peril, neither of which were present in this case. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "public use," arguing it was too broad and could potentially justify any seizure by claiming it served some public purpose. He also criticized their reliance on wartime powers as justification for peacetime actions, asserting this blurred important constitutional distinctions between peace and war times. Lastly, he expressed concern about potential abuse if such power remained unchecked by judicial review.