The Woodland case was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could tax a federal government-owned vessel. The case was brought by the United States against the State of California, which had imposed a tax on the vessel. The United States argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court held that the tax was unconstitutional because it interfered with the federal government's exclusive power to regulate commerce. The Court reasoned that the tax was a burden on interstate commerce and thus violated the Supremacy Clause. The Court also held that the tax was not a valid exercise of the state's power to tax property within its borders. The Court concluded that the tax was invalid and that the United States was entitled to a refund of the taxes paid. The Woodland case is an important precedent in the area of federalism and the power of the federal government to regulate commerce.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in The Woodland case. He argued that the majority's decision was too broad and could be used to justify a wide range of government actions, including those which would otherwise be unconstitutional. He noted that while it is true that Congress has certain powers under the Constitution, these should not be interpreted so broadly as to allow for any action by Congress regardless of its constitutionality. Furthermore, he argued that there must always remain some limits on what can and cannot be done by Congress; if this were not so then all constitutional protections would become meaningless. In conclusion, Justice Field believed that although it may have been necessary for Congress to take action in this particular instance due to an emergency situation, such power should only ever exist within strict boundaries set out by the Constitution itself.