In the United States v. Old Settlers case of 1892, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with resolving a dispute between two groups of Cherokee Indians - The Eastern Cherokees (Old Settlers) and Western Cherokees. The conflict arose from an 1835 treaty in which the federal government agreed to pay $5 million to the Cherokee Nation for their lands east of Mississippi River, but it was unclear how this sum should be divided among these factions. The Old Settlers argued that they had already moved west before this agreement and thus were entitled to a portion of funds independent from those given to Western Cherokees who migrated later under forced removal known as Trail of Tears. However, the court ruled against them stating that all payments made under treaties with Indian tribes are considered communal property belonging equally to every member regardless when or why they relocated westwardly; hence both groups must share any compensation received equitably without preference towards either faction's timing or circumstances surrounding their migration.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Old Settlers, Justice Brewer argued that the Cherokee Nation should not be forced to pay compensation to the "Old Settlers" (Western Cherokees) because they had already been compensated under previous treaties. He contended that these earlier agreements were binding and final, thus no further payment was necessary or justified. The majority's decision, according to him, ignored this historical context and set a dangerous precedent by allowing renegotiation of settled claims. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential negative impacts on future treaty negotiations between Native American tribes and the U.S government due to this ruling undermining trust in such agreements' permanence.