In the case of Williams v. Johnson in 1915, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership. The plaintiff, Williams, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had acquired it through inheritance. However, Johnson contested this claim and argued that he was the rightful owner because his ancestors were granted ownership by Congress before any other claims on the land existed. The court ruled in favor of Johnson stating that Congressional grants take precedence over all subsequent transactions or inheritances related to said property. Therefore, despite having bought the land from someone who inherited it legally under state law at some point after its initial grant by Congress to another party (Johnson's ancestors), Williams' claim was deemed invalid as federal law supersedes state laws regarding such matters.

In the dissenting opinion for Williams v. Johnson, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting interracial marriage violated both due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenting justices believed that such laws were based on racial prejudice and served no legitimate governmental interest. They also contended that these laws infringed upon individuals' fundamental right to marry, which they viewed as an essential aspect of liberty protected by due process clause. Furthermore, they asserted that banning interracial marriages constituted racial discrimination in violation of equal protection clause because it denied people the same legal rights solely based on their race. Therefore, according to them, such laws should be subjected to strict scrutiny -the most rigorous standard of judicial review- and struck down unless proven necessary for achieving a compelling state interest.