In the case of Lewis v. Roberts in 1924, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and inheritance laws. The plaintiff, Lewis, claimed that he was entitled to certain lands under Alabama state law as an heir of his deceased uncle who had no direct descendants or spouse at the time of death. However, these claims were contested by Roberts on behalf of other relatives who argued they were rightful heirs according to common law principles which favored blood relations over collateral kinship ties (such as uncles and nephews). The court ruled in favor of Roberts stating that while Alabama's statute did provide for succession rights for collateral relatives like nephews when there are no direct descendants or surviving spouses present; it also clearly stipulated that such rights only apply if there are no other closer blood relations alive - which wasn't the case here since there were living siblings whose claims superseded those made by Lewis.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Lewis v. Roberts argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law prohibiting interracial marriage was fundamentally flawed. The dissenters believed that such laws were inherently discriminatory and violated individuals' constitutional rights to equal protection under the law, as well as their fundamental right to marry whom they choose. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how these laws were applied, noting that while white people could not legally marry someone of another race, there were no similar restrictions on other racial groups marrying each other. This inconsistency further highlighted the racially biased nature of these laws and underscored their unconstitutionality according to this view.