In Alexander and Others v. Pendleton, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a state court had no authority to issue an injunction against individuals in another state. The case arose when several citizens of Georgia sought to enjoin William Pendleton from collecting debts owed by them in South Carolina. The plaintiffs argued that since they were not residents of South Carolina, their debt was not enforceable there under its laws and thus could not be collected by Pendleton without violating their rights as citizens of Georgia. However, the Supreme Court held that it was beyond the power of any one state's courts to interfere with matters within another sovereign jurisdiction; therefore, it affirmed the decision made by lower courts denying injunctive relief for these plaintiffs.

In Alexander and Others v. Pendleton, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by citizens of one state against citizens of another in which the amount in controversy exceeded $500. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction, as this would be unconstitutional under Article III Section 2 of the Constitution. However, Justice Johnson dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there was no constitutional prohibition preventing states from exercising their own powers; secondly, he contended that Congress had given its consent for states to exercise such power through legislation passed pursuant to Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 of the Constitution. He concluded by stating his belief that if Congress wished to limit or prohibit a state's ability to exercise its own powers then they should do so explicitly rather than relying upon implication or inference drawn from other parts of the Constitution.