The Stephens v. Cherokee Nation case in 1898 revolved around a dispute over land allotment within the Cherokee Nation. The plaintiff, William Wirt Stephens, claimed that he was entitled to an allotment of land as a citizen by blood of the Cherokee Nation under several treaties between the United States and the tribe. However, his claim was denied by both tribal authorities and U.S federal courts on grounds that he failed to establish his right to citizenship within stipulated deadlines set out in previous agreements. The Supreme Court upheld these decisions stating that it lacked jurisdiction over such matters which were primarily internal affairs of the tribe governed by its own laws and customs unless there is express legislation from Congress conferring such authority onto federal courts.

In the dissenting opinion for Stephens v. Cherokee Nation, it was argued that the court should not have jurisdiction over this case as it involves a dispute between sovereign nations - the United States and the Cherokee Nation. The dissenting justices believed that such disputes should be resolved through diplomatic channels rather than in U.S courts. They also disagreed with majority's interpretation of treaties and laws related to Native American tribes, arguing that these legal documents were intended to protect tribal sovereignty and rights, not undermine them. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on future relations between U.S government and Native American tribes if courts continue to intervene in such matters.