The U.S. Supreme Court case American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al. v. Maurice Smith, Director, Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, et al., 1989 revolved around the issue of whether a state could impose fees on commercial trucks for using its highways without violating the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The American Trucking Associations (ATA) argued that an Arkansas law imposing such fees was unconstitutional because it discriminated against interstate commerce by favoring local businesses over out-of-state ones. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with ATA's argument and upheld the constitutionality of Arkansas' fee system in a unanimous decision written by Justice Thurgood Marshall. The court held that as long as a state's highway use charges are based on some fair approximation of use or privilege for use and are not excessive in relation to benefits conferred then they do not violate Commerce Clause prohibitions against discrimination towards interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al. v. Maurice Smith, Director, Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, et al., Justice Scalia argued that the Court had overstepped its authority by interpreting a federal statute in such a way as to preempt state law without clear evidence of Congressional intent to do so. He contended that Congress did not intend for the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) to prevent states from imposing their own regulations on truck sizes and weights when it passed the legislation in 1994. Instead, he believed that Congress intended for states to retain this power under their traditional police powers unless explicitly prohibited by federal law. In his view, preemption should only occur when there is an actual conflict between state and federal laws or where compliance with both would be physically impossible.