In the 1900 Supreme Court case Treat v. White, the court examined a dispute over land ownership in Arkansas. The plaintiff, Treat, claimed that he had purchased the land from its original owner and was therefore entitled to it. However, White argued that he had acquired legal title to the property through adverse possession - a doctrine which allows someone who has been occupying or using another's property for an extended period of time without challenge from the owner to claim legal ownership of it. The lower courts ruled in favor of White based on his argument of adverse possession. Upon appeal by Treat however, this ruling was overturned by Justice Harlan and his colleagues at Supreme Court level who held that under federal law governing public lands (which superseded state laws), only those with valid purchase claims could acquire title to such properties. This meant that despite having occupied and used the disputed land for many years without any objection from its original owner or anyone else until Mr.Treat came into picture; Mr.White did not have any right over it as per prevailing federal laws because he never actually bought it legally from anyone.

In the dissenting opinion for Treat v. White, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on foreign-built ships owned by American citizens violated principles of free trade and equal protection under law. The dissenting justices believed that this tax unfairly discriminated against American ship owners who chose to purchase their vessels abroad rather than domestically, thereby limiting their freedom of choice in the global marketplace. They also contended that such a discriminatory tax could potentially harm international relations by creating economic barriers between nations. Furthermore, they asserted that all taxes should be applied uniformly without regard to where goods were produced or purchased as per constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal protection under law for all citizens. Therefore, according to them, this ruling contradicted both domestic and international legal norms promoting equality and free trade.