In the United States v. Barringer case of 1902, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership and mineral rights. The plaintiff, the U.S government, claimed that defendant William R. Barringer had unlawfully extracted valuable minerals from public lands in California's Death Valley region without obtaining proper authorization or paying required fees to the federal government. The court found that under existing law at that time - specifically an Act of Congress passed in 1872 - individuals were allowed to freely explore and extract minerals from public lands as long as they complied with local laws and regulations regarding mining claims. However, this right did not extend to include valuable deposits located beneath non-mineral land owned by others (in this case, the U.S Government). Therefore, even though Barringer had legally acquired surface rights for his mining operation through purchase from previous owners who held valid claims under state law; he was still liable for trespassing on federally-owned subsurface mineral reserves without permission or payment of royalties due.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Barringer, it was argued that the government did not have a right to seize property without providing just compensation. The justice believed that this case represented an overreach of governmental power and violated the Fifth Amendment's protection against seizure of private property without due process or fair compensation. He contended that while Congress may have had authority to regulate commerce, it could not use this power as a means to confiscate personal property arbitrarily. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constituted "property," arguing that goods in transit were still under ownership and thus protected by constitutional rights. In his view, allowing such seizures would set a dangerous precedent for future cases involving government intervention in private affairs.