In the Weyerhaeuser v. Minnesota case of 1899, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Frederick Weyerhaeuser and against the state of Minnesota concerning a dispute over land ownership. The State had sold certain swamp lands to private individuals before realizing that these were part of an indemnity grant from Congress meant for railroad construction purposes. When it discovered its mistake, Minnesota attempted to reclaim these lands but was challenged by Weyerhaeuser who had purchased some parcels from those initial buyers. The court held that once title passed into private hands, even if mistakenly done so by the State, it could not be reclaimed without compensation as this would violate due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, despite being initially public land intended for specific public use (railroad construction), once sold privately - albeit erroneously - such property couldn't be taken back without just compensation.

In the dissenting opinion for Weyerhaeuser v. Minnesota, it was argued that the state of Minnesota had a right to tax property located within its borders and owned by non-residents. The dissenting justices disagreed with the majority's interpretation of due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, arguing that these rights did not prevent states from taxing property based on its location rather than ownership. They believed this principle was well-established in previous case law and saw no reason to overturn it in this instance. Furthermore, they contended that if a state could not tax such properties, then local governments would be deprived of significant revenue needed for public services like schools and roads. Thus, they concluded that Minnesota's taxation scheme did not violate constitutional principles but instead represented an appropriate exercise of state power.