In the case of Sizemore v. Brady (1914), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Indian Territory, which later became part of Oklahoma. The plaintiff, Sizemore, claimed that he had purchased a parcel of land from an individual who was half Native American and half Caucasian but was not recognized as a member of any tribe. However, under existing laws at that time, only individuals officially recognized as tribal members could legally sell their allotted lands within Indian Territory. Therefore, the defendant Brady argued that since the seller wasn't officially acknowledged as a tribal member by federal authorities or his own tribe when he sold his allotment to Sizemore; hence this sale should be considered invalid. The court ruled in favor of Brady stating that even though there were some inconsistencies regarding how someone's status as an "Indian" was determined for different purposes such as voting rights or eligibility for annuities; it did not change the fact that only those formally enrolled on official tribal rolls could legally sell their allotted lands within Indian Territory.

The dissenting opinion in Sizemore v. Brady argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting interracial marriage was not only unconstitutional, but also fundamentally unjust. The dissenting justices believed that the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed all citizens equal protection under the law, regardless of race or ethnicity. They contended that laws banning interracial marriage were inherently discriminatory and violated this constitutional principle. Furthermore, they asserted such laws served no legitimate public interest and were merely an expression of racial prejudice and bigotry. Therefore, they concluded these laws should be struck down as unconstitutional.