In the case of United States v. State of Oklahoma in 1922, the Supreme Court was asked to resolve a dispute over jurisdiction and ownership between Texas and Oklahoma concerning an area known as Greer County. The region had been claimed by both states due to conflicting interpretations of a treaty with Spain that defined territorial boundaries. In its decision, the court ruled in favor of Texas based on historical evidence showing that it had exercised authority over this territory since becoming a state in 1845. This ruling effectively transferred control from Oklahoma back to Texas, establishing legal precedent for resolving similar boundary disputes between states.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. State of Oklahoma, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the 1866 treaty between the U.S. government and Creek Nation. He argued that this treaty did not grant absolute title to lands in question but merely a right of occupancy which could be terminated by Congress at any time. In his view, when Congress passed legislation opening up these lands for settlement in 1901, it effectively extinguished any remaining rights held by Creek Nation or its members over those territories. Therefore, he believed that Oklahoma had rightfully gained jurisdiction over all such lands upon becoming a state in 1907 and should retain control over them now.