In the United States v. Jones case of 1892, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute concerning land ownership in Washington D.C. The plaintiff, Thomas H. Jones, claimed that he had purchased several lots from William Mayse and his wife in 1866 but later discovered that they did not have legal title to sell them as they were part of an estate held by trustees for minor children under a will. When Jones attempted to assert his claim over these lands against subsequent purchasers who bought it from the trustees after reaching their majority age, he was met with resistance leading him to file suit. The court found that although there may have been some irregularities in how the property was initially sold by Mayse and his wife without proper authority or consent from all parties involved (the minors), this did not invalidate subsequent sales made by those same minors once they reached adulthood and gained full rights over their inheritance according to local law at that time. Therefore, even though Jones might have had some legitimate grievances about how things transpired originally when he first bought these disputed properties back in 1866; ultimately it was deemed irrelevant because those issues should've been addressed then rather than now many years later after other innocent third-party buyers got involved unknowingly into this mess through no fault of their own.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Jones, 1892, Justice Brewer argued that the government's seizure of lottery tickets sent through mail was unconstitutional. He contended that Congress did not have the authority to regulate what could be transported in interstate commerce unless it directly impacted public safety or morality. In his view, lottery tickets did not fall into these categories and thus should not be subject to federal regulation. Furthermore, he asserted that if Congress had such power over interstate commerce as claimed by majority decision then it would lead to an excessive concentration of power at a federal level which is against principles of states' rights and individual liberties enshrined in Constitution.