In the case of Northwestern Bands of Shoshone Indians v. United States in 1944, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over land rights between the Northwestern Bands of Shoshone Indians and the federal government. The tribe claimed that they were entitled to compensation for lands taken from them by settlers under an 1863 treaty, which had been violated when Congress opened their reservation lands for public settlement without providing just compensation. However, the court held that while there was indeed a violation of treaty obligations by allowing settlement before payment was made or agreed upon, this did not constitute a taking requiring compensation under Fifth Amendment principles because it occurred prior to these principles being applied to Indian property rights in 1896. Therefore, no monetary damages were awarded to the tribe as they could not prove any loss suffered due to this action.

In the dissenting opinion for Northwestern Bands of Shoshone Indians v. United States, Justice Frank Murphy argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of both historical and legal facts. He contended that the Fort Bridger Treaty had not been abrogated by Congress but rather violated by white settlers and miners encroaching on Shoshone lands. The government’s failure to protect these rights constituted an injustice against the tribe, which should be compensated accordingly. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "Indian title," arguing it was more than mere occupancy rights; it included full beneficial ownership subject only to federal power to regulate commerce with Indian tribes. Therefore, any unauthorized taking or damaging of such property is compensable under Fifth Amendment principles requiring just compensation for takings of private property for public use.