Alexander Murray, Esq. v. Schooner Charming Betsy was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1804 that dealt with the interpretation of federal statutes and their application to maritime law. The dispute arose when Alexander Murray, an American citizen living in France, sued the owners of a schooner called Charming Betsy for damages caused by its captain's negligence while transporting goods from Baltimore to France. The court ruled that although Congress had not specifically addressed this issue at the time, it did have authority under Article III of the Constitution to pass laws regulating commerce between nations and among states; thus any statute passed by Congress would be binding on all citizens regardless of where they lived or what country they were from. Furthermore, since international maritime law is based upon principles established through custom and usage rather than written codes or treaties, it must also be respected as part of U.S.-based commercial transactions involving foreign vessels such as those owned by Murray’s opponents in this case - meaning he could seek redress for his losses according to both domestic and international standards applicable at sea

In the case of Alexander Murray, Esq. v. Schooner Charming Betsy, Justice Samuel Chase delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that Congress had no authority to pass laws regulating maritime commerce and navigation between states or with foreign nations. He reasoned that such power was not granted by the Constitution and therefore could not be exercised by Congress without violating its provisions. Furthermore, he contended that if this power were allowed then it would lead to an encroachment on state sovereignty as well as an infringement upon individual rights protected under the Constitution. As such, Justice Chase concluded that any law passed by Congress attempting to regulate maritime commerce must be declared unconstitutional and void for lack of constitutional authority.