In the United States Supreme Court case of The United States v. Lawrence Coombs, the plaintiff argued that a certain tract of land in Michigan was part of the public domain and therefore belonged to them. The defendant, Mr. Coombs, claimed he had purchased it from an Indian tribe who held title to it prior to its becoming part of the public domain. The court found that although Mr. Coombs may have believed he had acquired valid title from this Indian tribe, his purchase did not give him any legal rights since they were not authorized by Congress or recognized by law as having authority over such lands at that time. As such, the court ruled in favor of The United States and declared their claim on this tract as valid and binding upon all parties involved in this dispute

In the case of The United States v. Lawrence Coombs, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a treaty between the United States and Great Britain had been violated by an individual citizen. In this particular instance, Mr. Coombs had taken possession of a British vessel that had been abandoned in American waters during wartime without obtaining permission from either country's government first. Chief Justice Taney delivered a dissenting opinion arguing that while it is true that treaties are binding on both countries, they do not bind individuals unless specifically stated as such within their text or if Congress has passed legislation making them so. He further argued that since no such language existed in this particular treaty nor any subsequent laws enacted by Congress regarding its enforcement, Mr. Coombs could not be held liable for his actions under international law and should therefore be acquitted of all charges against him brought forth by the United States government.