In the case of Stearns v. Minnesota, 1900, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over taxation on railroad lands in Minnesota. The Northern Pacific Railroad Company had been granted land by Congress to build a railway line and sold some of this land to Charles C. Stearns who later refused to pay taxes levied by the state on his property arguing that under federal law these lands were exempt from taxation until they had been sold and conveyed out of ownership by the railroad company. The court ruled against Stearns stating that once title has passed from the government or its grantee (in this case, Northern Pacific), then it is subject to state taxation regardless if there was an existing mortgage held by Northern Pacific at time of sale or not. This decision upheld states' rights to tax properties within their jurisdiction even when those properties are part of federal grants for specific purposes such as building railroads which further clarified how laws regarding property transfer and subsequent obligations like paying taxes work across different levels - federal and state -of governance in America's legal system.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Stearns v. Minnesota argued that the state's taxation on ore mined from leased federal lands was unconstitutional. The justice contended that such a tax interfered with federal property rights and infringed upon the U.S government's exclusive right to control and manage its own property, including leasing it for mining purposes. This view held that states did not have jurisdiction over federally owned land within their borders unless explicitly granted by Congress, which had not occurred in this instance. Therefore, according to this perspective, Minnesota’s imposition of taxes constituted an unlawful intrusion into federal authority.