United States v. The Grace Lothrop was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a vessel that was seized by the United States for violating the revenue laws of the United States was subject to forfeiture. The vessel, The Grace Lothrop, was seized by the United States for violating the revenue laws of the United States by transporting goods without paying the required duties. The vessel was owned by a British subject, and the British government argued that the vessel should not be subject to forfeiture because it was owned by a British subject. The Supreme Court held that the vessel was subject to forfeiture because the revenue laws of the United States applied to all vessels, regardless of the nationality of the owner. The Court reasoned that the revenue laws of the United States were intended to protect the revenue of the United States, and that the nationality of the owner was irrelevant. The Court also held that the vessel was subject to forfeiture because it had been used to violate the revenue laws of the United States. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the vessel, The Grace Lothrop, was subject to forfeiture because it had been used to violate the revenue laws of the United States. The Court reasoned that the revenue laws of the United States applied to all vessels, regardless of the nationality of the owner, and that the vessel was subject to forfeiture because it had been used to violate the revenue laws of the United States.

In United States v. The Grace Lothrop, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a vessel that had been seized by the government for violating customs laws could be sold without first obtaining a court order. Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion, arguing that such an action would violate due process of law and deprive owners of their property without any legal authority or justification. He argued that it was not within Congress' power to authorize such seizures and sales without judicial approval as this would amount to an unconstitutional taking of private property in violation of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. Furthermore, he noted that even if Congress did have such authority, it should still require some form of judicial review before allowing vessels to be sold in order to protect against arbitrary actions taken by executive officers who may lack sufficient knowledge about particular cases or circumstances surrounding them.