Philip Minis was the plaintiff in error in a Supreme Court case against the United States. The dispute arose from an 1839 contract between Minis and the Secretary of War, which granted him permission to occupy certain lands for grazing purposes. After occupying these lands for two years, he received notice that his permit had been revoked by Congress due to their belief that it violated existing laws concerning Indian reservations. In response, Minis filed suit claiming damages as a result of this revocation and argued that Congress did not have authority over such matters since they were outside its jurisdiction. The court ultimately ruled against Minis on grounds that Congress has exclusive power over all public land within its boundaries and thus could revoke any permits issued without violating constitutional law or infringing upon individual rights.

In the case of Philip Minis v. The United States, Justice McLean delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should have reversed its decision and found for the plaintiff. He believed that Congress had no authority to pass laws regulating slavery in territories acquired by treaty with foreign nations, as it did when it passed an act prohibiting slavery in Missouri Territory. According to Justice McLean, this was a violation of Article VI of the Constitution which states that treaties are "the supreme law of the land." Furthermore, he argued that if Congress could regulate slavery within these territories then they would be able to do so without regard for any existing state or territorial laws on the matter. As such, Justice McLean concluded that Congress' action was unconstitutional and should not be allowed to stand.