The U.S. Supreme Court case Miller, as Alien Property Custodian, et al. v. Robertson in 1924 revolved around the issue of property rights during wartime and involved the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917. The Alien Property Custodian had seized shares belonging to a German national under this act during World War I and sold them to an American citizen named Robertson after war's end. When Germany was no longer considered an enemy nation, the original owner sought return of his property or its value from Robertson who refused on grounds that he bought it legally from a government official (the custodian). The court ruled in favor of Robertson stating that once peace is declared, former enemies can reclaim their properties only if they haven't been sold by the government to third parties acting in good faith without knowledge about any defects in title.

In the dissenting opinion for Miller, as Alien Property Custodian, et al. v. Robertson, Justice Holmes argued that the Trading with the Enemy Act did not grant authority to seize property of an American citizen who was residing in Germany during World War I. He contended that while Congress had broad powers to enact legislation related to war efforts and national security, these powers were not unlimited and should be interpreted narrowly when they infringe upon individual rights or liberties. In this case, he believed that seizing a U.S citizen's property simply because they resided in enemy territory exceeded Congressional authority under the act and violated constitutional protections against unlawful seizures of private property without due process of law.