In the United States v. Creek Nation case of 1934, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Creek Nation, an indigenous tribe in Oklahoma. The dispute arose over land that had been taken from them by the U.S government without compensation during a period between 1901 and 1905. The court found that this seizure was illegal under existing treaties at that time which guaranteed protection for tribal lands against encroachment or forced cession without just compensation. As such, it held that Congress had acted unlawfully when it seized these lands and ordered payment to be made to compensate for this loss. This decision marked a significant victory for Native American rights as it upheld treaty obligations and recognized their entitlement to fair treatment under law.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Creek Nation, it was argued that the majority's interpretation of the 1866 treaty between the U.S. and Creek Nation was incorrect. The dissenters believed that under this treaty, any unallotted lands were to be sold by the U.S., with proceeds going to a trust fund for Creek Nation’s benefit - not directly paid out as per capita payments to tribal members as done in 1901-1902. They contended that these sales were part of an overall policy shift towards assimilation and allotment rather than recognition of tribal sovereignty over land resources, thus should not be considered a breach warranting compensation from government funds. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority's view on 'just compensation' clause application here; arguing instead that since Congress had plenary power over Indian affairs including their property rights adjustments without consent or payment – no Fifth Amendment violation occurred in this case.