In the United States v. Pitman case of 1892, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in California. The plaintiff, the U.S government, claimed that certain lands were public and therefore belonged to them. On the other hand, defendant Pitman argued that these lands were private property under Mexican law before California became part of America and thus should remain as such under American law too. The court ruled in favor of Pitman stating that when territories are acquired by the U.S., it is bound to respect pre-existing rights including those related to property unless explicitly annulled by Congress or treaty stipulations. Therefore, if any land was privately owned under Mexican rule prior to its acquisition by America then it would continue being so unless otherwise stated.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Pitman, it was argued that the court's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant. The dissenting justices contended that allowing such evidence to be used in court would set a dangerous precedent, effectively condoning unlawful police conduct and undermining citizens' constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. They believed that any evidence obtained in this manner should be deemed inadmissible, regardless of its relevance or reliability. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuses of power by law enforcement officials if such practices were allowed to continue unchecked.