In the case of McDaid v. Oklahoma Territory, ex rel. Smith in 1893, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership rights in Oklahoma Territory. The plaintiff, McDaid claimed that he had acquired title to certain lands through purchase from individuals who were part of an Indian tribe and thus held original title to those lands. However, under federal law at that time, individual members of tribes did not have authority to sell tribal lands without approval from Congress or other federal authorities which was not obtained in this case. The defendant Smith argued that since such approval was never sought or granted for these sales by the Indians to McDaid; therefore his claim on the land is invalid and should be dismissed. The court agreed with Smith's argument stating that any sale made by individual members of an Indian tribe without proper authorization is void as per existing laws thereby rendering McDaid’s claim null and void.

The dissenting opinion in the case of McDaid v. Oklahoma Territory, Ex Rel. Smith argued that the majority's decision to uphold a territorial law requiring saloon keepers to pay an annual license fee was incorrect and unconstitutional. The dissenting justices believed that this law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by unfairly targeting one specific group for taxation while exempting others engaged in similar businesses from such fees. They also contended that it infringed upon individual liberties protected under due process rights by imposing excessive penalties for non-compliance with these licensing requirements without providing adequate legal recourse or protections against arbitrary enforcement actions taken by local authorities.