In the case of New Mexico v. United States Trust Company, 1898, the Supreme Court was asked to decide on a dispute over land grants in New Mexico. The territory of New Mexico had granted certain lands to a railway company, which later transferred these lands to the United States Trust Company. However, when it became apparent that some parts of this land were mineral-rich and potentially valuable for mining purposes, an argument arose about who should rightfully own them - whether they should remain with the U.S. Trust or revert back to public ownership under federal law. The court ruled in favor of the U.S. Trust Company by upholding its right as per original grant terms without any reversion clause for minerals discovered subsequently on those lands; thus affirming that such rights remained unaffected by subsequent discovery or valuation changes due to mineral deposits found therein.

The dissenting opinion in the case of New Mexico v. United States Trust Company argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax imposed by New Mexico on bonds issued by a railroad company was incorrect. The dissenters believed that this tax violated the Constitution's Contracts Clause, which prohibits states from passing laws impairing contractual obligations. They contended that when these bonds were initially issued, they were exempt from taxation under federal law and any subsequent state legislation imposing taxes on them would be unconstitutional as it impairs their value and thus breaches contract rights of bondholders. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of previous court decisions regarding similar issues, arguing those cases did not establish precedent for allowing such taxation but rather emphasized protection against impairment of contracts.