In the 1899 case of Peabody v. United States, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government regarding a dispute over land ownership. The plaintiff, Peabody, claimed that he had purchased certain lands from Native American tribes before they were ceded to the United States and thus held rightful title to them. However, under an act passed by Congress in 1862 which stated that all such sales or grants made after March 3rd, 1834 would be null and void unless approved by Congress itself; his claim was deemed invalid. The court upheld this law stating it was within Congressional power to regulate commerce with Native American tribes including transactions involving tribal lands. Therefore, since Peabody's purchase did not have congressional approval as required by law at that time; his claim on those lands was rejected.

In the dissenting opinion for Peabody v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the government had no right to seize property without due process of law. He contended that even in a time of war or insurrection, constitutional rights could not be suspended and private property could not be taken without just compensation. The majority's decision allowed for such seizures under martial law during wartime, but Harlan vehemently disagreed with this interpretation of the Constitution. He believed it was dangerous to allow military authorities unchecked power over citizens' properties and lives during times of crisis, arguing that these are precisely when individual liberties need most protection from potential governmental abuse.