In the 1896 case of Long Island Water Supply Company v. Brooklyn, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Brooklyn, affirming that a municipality has the right to protect its water supply from potential contamination or depletion by outside entities. The dispute arose when Long Island Water Supply Company sought to extract and sell water from wells within Queens County, which was part of Brooklyn's watershed area at that time. The city argued this would endanger their public health and welfare by threatening their clean water source. In response, the company claimed it had obtained all necessary permissions under state law for such operations. The court upheld an injunction against the company's activities stating that while private property rights are important, they do not supersede a community’s right to safeguard its essential resources like drinking water supplies against possible harm or exploitation - even if those threats come from lawful businesses operating under state permits.

In the dissenting opinion for Long Island Water Supply Company v. Brooklyn, 1896, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow Brooklyn to condemn and take over a private water company's property without proper compensation violated basic principles of justice and fairness. The dissenting justices believed that this ruling undermined the constitutional protection of private property rights against government seizure without just compensation as outlined in the Fifth Amendment. They contended that such an action by a municipality should be considered unconstitutional unless fair market value is paid for any seized assets or properties. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential misuse of power by local governments if allowed unchecked authority to seize private properties under eminent domain laws without providing adequate remuneration.