The United States Supreme Court case, United States v. Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company (1928), centered around a dispute over land grants in Texas. The U.S. government had granted the railway company certain lands for the construction of railroads under an 1866 Act of Congress and later sought to reclaim some of these lands that were not used for railroad purposes within five years as stipulated by the act. The railway company argued that it was entitled to keep all granted lands because they had completed their line within ten years as required by another clause in the same act. However, the court ruled against them stating that both conditions needed to be fulfilled - completion of lines within ten years and use of land specifically for railroad purposes within five years - otherwise unused portions would revert back to government ownership.

The dissenting opinion in the case of United States v. Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company argued that the majority's decision to allow the government to recover money from a private railway company was incorrect. The dissenters believed that this ruling violated principles of fairness and justice because it allowed for retroactive punishment. They pointed out that at the time when these transactions occurred, there were no laws or regulations prohibiting them; thus, they should not be penalized after-the-fact based on new rules or standards. Furthermore, they contended that such an approach could have negative implications for business operations and economic stability as companies would constantly be uncertain about potential future liabilities arising from their current actions.