In the 1896 case of Moses v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving land ownership and mineral rights. The plaintiff, Moses, had purchased a piece of property in California from an individual who had obtained it under the Preemption Act of 1841 - legislation that allowed "squatters" to purchase up to 160 acres before they were offered for sale publicly. Later, valuable minerals were discovered on this land and claimed by others under mining laws which stated that all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States are free and open to exploration and purchase. The court held that since there was no evidence at time of entry or patent issuance suggesting presence of such minerals; hence those rights remained with Moses as part his original preemption claim despite subsequent discovery after transferal. Therefore, he retained full ownership over both surface estate as well subsurface resources found within boundaries defined by his deed.

The dissenting opinion in the Moses v. United States case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of the law. The dissent pointed out that, according to established legal principles, a person cannot be held liable for an act unless they had knowledge of it or were willfully blind to its occurrence. In this case, Moses was convicted based on his association with a group involved in illegal activities without clear evidence showing he knew about those activities or deliberately ignored them. This conviction contradicted these principles and set a dangerous precedent by potentially criminalizing mere association rather than actual participation in unlawful acts. Furthermore, the dissent criticized how vague terms like "conspiracy" were used to justify broad interpretations of guilt by association which could lead to abuses of power and violations of individual rights.