In Lynch et al. v. Bernal et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a state court had the authority to issue a writ of habeas corpus to a prisoner held in federal custody. The case arose when the state court issued a writ of habeas corpus to a prisoner held in federal custody, and the federal government refused to comply. The Supreme Court held that the state court did not have the authority to issue the writ of habeas corpus, as the federal government had exclusive jurisdiction over the prisoner. The Court reasoned that the writ of habeas corpus was a federal prerogative, and that the state court had no authority to interfere with the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction. The Court also held that the writ of habeas corpus was a fundamental right, and that the federal government had the exclusive power to protect it. The Court concluded that the state court had no authority to issue the writ of habeas corpus, and that the federal government had exclusive jurisdiction over the prisoner.

In Lynch et al. v. Bernal et al., the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by non-residents against residents of that same state, when the cause of action arose in another state and involved real property located in yet another state. The majority opinion held that such suits were not within the jurisdiction of any single court, but rather should be heard by a federal tribunal or through concurrent proceedings in multiple states' courts. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that it would lead to unnecessary complexity and expense for litigants who wished to bring suit across different jurisdictions; he argued instead for allowing each individual case to be decided on its own merits as far as which court had proper jurisdiction over it. He further noted that there was no constitutional basis for denying states their right to adjudicate cases involving parties from other states if they so chose, particularly since Congress has not passed any legislation specifically prohibiting such actions.