In the case of Sugden et ux. v. United States, 1955, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S government regarding a dispute over land ownership in Alaska. The Sugdens claimed that they had acquired title to certain Alaskan lands through adverse possession under territorial law before Alaska became a state and thus were not subject to federal laws enacted after its statehood which reserved those lands for public use. However, the court held that their claim was invalid because it conflicted with federal policy concerning property rights in territories becoming states as outlined by Congress's Property Clause powers and relevant legislation like Submerged Lands Act (SLA) and Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). Therefore, even if they had established adverse possession under territorial law prior to statehood, such claims could not override subsequent federal reservation of those lands for public purposes post-statehood.

In the dissenting opinion for Sugden et ux. v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on income derived from property held in trust by U.S. citizens living abroad contradicted previous court rulings and legal principles regarding taxation of foreign trusts. The dissenting justices contended that under international law, only the country where a trust is located has jurisdiction over its administration and therefore has exclusive rights to tax its income. They also pointed out inconsistencies between this case and earlier cases involving similar issues, suggesting that the Court had departed from established precedent without sufficient justification or explanation.