In the United States v. United Verde Copper Company case of 1904, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and mining rights in Arizona. The U.S government claimed that the United Verde Copper Company had unlawfully occupied public lands for its mining operations without obtaining necessary permissions or paying required fees. The company argued that it was operating under an existing Mexican grant which predated American jurisdiction over these territories following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, hence they were not subject to federal laws governing public lands. However, upon review, it was found that there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove this claim as no official records existed confirming such a grant from Mexico's government before America acquired these territories. Therefore, the court ruled against United Verde Copper Company stating that their occupation and use of said lands were illegal since they failed to comply with American laws pertaining to mineral extraction on public property.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. United Verde Copper Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of the copper company was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant errors made by both courts regarding their interpretation and application of mining laws. They pointed out that these laws clearly state that mineral deposits located on public lands are free and open to exploration, but they also stipulate certain conditions which must be met before ownership rights can be granted. In this case, those conditions had not been fulfilled because no valuable discovery of minerals had been made within the limits of the claim at issue when it was filed or even years after filing. Therefore, according to them, neither possession nor title could have passed from government to claimant under existing law as interpreted by Supreme Court precedent; thus making any subsequent sale invalid too.