In the United States Supreme Court case of The United States v. Daniel W. Coxe and Others, the court was asked to decide whether a patent granted by Congress in 1793 for lands on both sides of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania was valid or not. At issue were conflicting claims between two parties: one claiming title under an earlier grant from William Penn's heirs, and another claiming title under a later grant from Congress. The court ultimately held that while there may have been some irregularities with respect to how the patent had been issued, it did not invalidate its effect as a conveyance of land rights; thus affirming that those who held title under this particular congressional grant could retain their ownership rights over these lands along the Susquehanna River.

In the United States v. Daniel W. Coxe and Others, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a certain tract of land in Pennsylvania belonged to the federal government or to private individuals who had purchased it from state authorities. The majority opinion held that since Congress had not expressly authorized any sale of this particular tract, it remained part of public lands owned by the United States and could not be sold without congressional approval. In his dissenting opinion, Justice John Catron argued that although Congress did not explicitly authorize such sales, they were implicitly allowed under an act passed in 1796 which granted states authority over their own lands until otherwise directed by Congress. He further argued that since no action had been taken by Congress on this matter for nearly sixty years prior to suit being brought against these purchasers, they should have been able to rely on their purchases as valid titles regardless of Congressional authorization or lack thereof at time of purchase.