In the United States v. Hite case of 1906, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving land rights and ownership in Oklahoma. The defendant, Mr. Hite, was accused by the U.S government of unlawfully settling on and claiming lands that were part of an Indian reservation belonging to the Osage Indians under Congressional Acts from 1872 and 1883. These acts had set aside these lands for exclusive use by this tribe until they chose to sell them or until Congress decided otherwise. However, Mr.Hite argued that he had legally purchased his plot from a member of another tribe who claimed it as surplus after allotments were made to individual tribal members under an Act passed in June 28th,1898 which allowed other tribes' members to claim surplus lands within reservations not their own.The court sided with the government stating that only Congress could authorize such sales or transfers outside specific tribes assigned those territories; thus making any sale invalid if done without congressional approval regardless whether it was sold by one Native American to another non-member.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Hite, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant. The dissenting justices believed that any evidence obtained in such a manner should be excluded from trial proceedings as "fruit of the poisonous tree." They contended that allowing this kind of evidence not only infringes upon individual liberties but also undermines public trust in law enforcement agencies by implicitly condoning their illegal actions. Furthermore, they expressed concern about setting a dangerous precedent where constitutional protections could be easily circumvented under the guise of criminal investigation.