In the 1900 case of Scranton v. Wheeler, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and water rights between the city of Scranton, Pennsylvania and private citizens. The city had purchased land around a lake to secure its water supply but this action was challenged by local residents who claimed they held fishing and boating rights on that same body of water. The court ruled in favor of the City of Scranton, stating that when it comes to public utilities like water supplies for cities, public necessity overrides private property rights. This decision set an important precedent regarding eminent domain - which is government's power to take or regulate private property for public use without owner's consent - especially as it pertains to resources essential for community survival such as clean drinking water.

In the dissenting opinion for Scranton v. Wheeler, Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision that private property owners could not be prevented from altering their land in ways that obstructed public navigation rights. He argued that navigable waters are a national resource and should remain unobstructed for public use. The right to navigate these waters freely is essential to commerce and communication between states, he contended, so any obstruction of this right would violate the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Furthermore, he believed it was within Congress' power to regulate obstructions on navigable rivers even if they were caused by improvements made on private lands adjacent to those rivers.