In the United States v. Union Pacific Railroad Company case of 1918, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, asserting its right to recover lands that were granted conditionally to railroad companies for construction purposes but remained unused. The Union Pacific Railroad Company had been given land by Congress under a conditional grant intended to encourage railway expansion across America's western frontier during the mid-19th century. However, some portions of this land were never used for constructing railroads and thus violated conditions set forth in original grants from Congress. The court held that such unutilized lands should revert back to federal ownership as they did not fulfill their purpose stipulated within these grants - promoting development through railroad construction.

The dissenting opinion in the case of United States v. Union Pacific Railroad Company argued that the majority's decision to allow the government to retain ownership of lands granted by Congress for railroad construction was incorrect. The dissenters believed that once a patent had been issued, it could not be revoked without due process and compensation for any improvements made on the land. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Congressional intent, arguing that Congress intended for railroads to have full title to these lands upon completion of their lines, rather than retaining a reversionary interest in them. Furthermore, they contended that this ruling would create uncertainty and instability in property rights across all industries where similar grants were made by Congress.