In the case of Northern Pacific Railroad Company v. Whalen in 1892, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Northern Pacific Railroad Company. The dispute arose over a land grant given to the railroad company by Congress as part of an act passed on July 2, 1864. This act granted lands to several states for railroad construction purposes and included indemnity provisions if portions were found unfit for use due to pre-existing claims or reservations. Mr. Whalen claimed ownership rights over a portion of this land based on his homestead application filed after the passage of this Act but before its implementation by surveying and selection process done by government officials and railway authorities respectively. The court held that once Congress had approved these grants, they became effective immediately upon identification suitable lands even though formal procedures such as surveys or selections might not have been completed yet at that time; thus preempting any subsequent private claims like those made by Mr.Whalen unless specifically exempted under law.

In the dissenting opinion for Northern Pacific Railroad Company v. Whalen, it was argued that the majority's decision to grant a right of way through public lands to railroad companies under an 1864 Act did not automatically include mineral rights. The dissenting justices contended that such a broad interpretation could lead to unintended consequences and potential abuses by corporations at the expense of public interest. They believed that if Congress had intended for railroads to have access to valuable minerals beneath their tracks, they would have explicitly stated so in the legislation. Therefore, according to this view, any ambiguity should be resolved in favor of limiting corporate power and preserving natural resources for future generations rather than granting expansive property rights based on inferred legislative intent.