In the United States v. Bitter Root Development Company case of 1905, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Montana. The U.S. government claimed that certain lands were part of an Indian reservation and thus belonged to them, while the Bitter Root Development Company argued they had purchased these lands from individual Indians who held title to them. The court ruled in favor of the U.S., stating that even though some tribal members may have occupied specific parcels within reservations, this did not give them private property rights as understood under non-Indian law; rather, all reservation land was collectively owned by tribes and managed by federal trusteeship until Congress decided otherwise. Therefore, any sales made by individuals without congressional approval were invalid.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Bitter Root Development Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow private ownership of land within a reservation conflicted with previous rulings and federal policy regarding Native American lands. The dissenters believed that Congress had intended to reserve these lands exclusively for tribal use when they established the reservation, and thus any subsequent sale or transfer of this land to non-Native entities should be considered invalid. They also contended that allowing such sales would undermine tribal sovereignty and self-determination by depriving tribes of their rightful territory without their consent or compensation. Furthermore, they warned that this ruling could set a dangerous precedent by encouraging further encroachment on Native American lands in future cases.