In the 1906 case of Newman v. Gates, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Colorado. The plaintiff, Newman, claimed that he had acquired title to certain lands through preemption rights under federal law and sought to eject the defendant, Gates. However, it was found that at the time when Newman supposedly established his claim on these lands by building a cabin and making improvements thereon as required by law for preemption purposes; these lands were not yet open for settlement or acquisition under any laws of Congress but were part of an Indian reservation. Therefore, his supposed acts did not confer upon him any valid claim or right against anyone else who subsequently entered upon such lands after they became legally available for settlement or purchase from government authorities. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of Gates stating that no one can acquire valid preemptive rights on public lands while they are still reserved for Indians and before they have been officially opened up by competent authority for general settlement or sale.

In the dissenting opinion for Newman v. Gates, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on stockholders' shares in national banks conflicted with previous rulings and interpretations of federal law. The dissent contended that such taxation should be considered unconstitutional because it interfered with Congress's exclusive power over national banking associations. It also pointed out inconsistencies between this ruling and earlier decisions where similar taxes were struck down as unlawful impositions on federal entities or operations. Furthermore, the dissent criticized the majority for failing to adequately consider how their decision might negatively impact national banks by subjecting them to potentially excessive state taxation, thereby undermining their stability and effectiveness as federally chartered institutions.