The Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma et al. v. United States case in 1967 revolved around the issue of whether or not the U.S government was liable for mismanaging tribal funds and lands belonging to the Peoria tribe, which were held in trust by the government. The Supreme Court ruled that while it is true that a fiduciary relationship exists between Native American tribes and the federal government, this does not automatically make them legally accountable for any alleged mismanagement without specific laws or treaties stipulating such responsibility. In other words, general principles of trusteeship law could not be applied unless there was explicit legislation mandating governmental liability under those principles.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma v. United States argued that the majority's decision failed to properly interpret and apply relevant federal statutes, particularly those related to Indian land claims. The dissent criticized the majority for not giving due weight to historical context and legislative intent when interpreting these laws. It was also suggested that by denying compensation for lands taken from them without their consent, the court effectively condoned a breach of trust by the U.S government towards Native American tribes. This view held that such an interpretation undermines tribal sovereignty and fails to uphold principles of justice and fairness enshrined in U.S law.