In Roberts v. Lewis, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over land ownership in California. The case involved two parties who both claimed rights to a parcel of land under different acts of Congress - one party under an 1866 Act and another under an 1870 Act. The court held that the claimant who had complied with all requirements set forth by the law at the time they initiated their claim (in this case, it was under the 1866 act) should be given preference over later claims made after new laws were enacted (the 1870 act). Therefore, even though both parties had valid claims according to each respective law, priority was given to those who followed procedures first established by earlier legislation.

The dissenting opinion in the Roberts v. Lewis case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law prohibiting interracial marriage was fundamentally flawed and unjust. The dissenters believed that such laws violated individuals' basic rights to marry whomever they chose, regardless of race or ethnicity. They contended that these types of prohibitions were not only discriminatory but also unconstitutional as they infringed upon personal liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens. The dissenting justices maintained that it was not within the state's power to dictate who could and could not marry based on racial classifications, asserting this overstepped governmental boundaries into private life decisions.