In the 1935 case of Violet Trapping Co., Inc. v. Grace, Register State Land Office, et al., the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Louisiana. The Violet Trapping Company claimed that it had acquired title to certain marsh lands through prescription under state law and sought an injunction against state officials who were interfering with its possession of these lands based on their claim that they belonged to the state. However, the court ruled against Violet Trapping Company stating that since there was no evidence showing any actual adverse possession or use by them for more than ten years as required by Louisiana law for acquiring title through prescription, their claim could not be upheld. Furthermore, even if such evidence existed, federal laws governing disposal of public lands would supersede any conflicting provisions in state law.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Violet Trapping Co., Inc. v. Grace, Register State Land Office, et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold Louisiana's law prohibiting non-residents from owning land for trapping purposes was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar issues and violated constitutional principles of equal protection under the law. The dissent contended that this ruling effectively allowed states to discriminate against out-of-state citizens by denying them property rights based solely on their residency status, which contradicted established interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. They also pointed out potential negative economic implications as it could discourage interstate commerce and investment if other states adopted similar laws.