In the 1991 case of Keyton E. Barker and Pauline Barker, et al., v. Kansas, et al., the petitioners challenged their convictions for drug offenses under a Kansas statute that allowed evidence obtained through warrantless aerial surveillance to be used in court. The Barkers argued that this violated their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, the U.S Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of such surveillance methods by ruling in favor of Kansas. The Court held that individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy from overhead observation without physical intrusion into private property as it does not constitute an unreasonable search under Fourth Amendment principles.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Keyton E. Barker and Pauline Barker, et al., v. Kansas, et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law imposing tax on natural gas consumed within its borders was inconsistent with previous rulings regarding interstate commerce. The dissenters contended that this ruling violated the Commerce Clause by allowing states to impose taxes on goods while they are still part of interstate commerce flow. They believed it could potentially lead to multiple taxation from different states for one transaction or product movement across state lines, which would be burdensome for businesses and hinder free trade among states. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of when a good stops being part of interstate commerce and becomes subject to state taxation power.