The case of Boteler v. Ingels, Director of Motor Vehicles of California et al., 1939, revolved around the issue of whether a state law could supersede federal bankruptcy laws. The plaintiff, Boteler, was a trustee in bankruptcy who sought to recover penalties paid by the bankrupt estate under California's Vehicle Code for driving without liability insurance. The defendants were officials responsible for enforcing this code. According to federal law at that time, penalties incurred before filing for bankruptcy could be discharged; however, according to California’s Vehicle Code section 419 and 420a (now repealed), these fines couldn't be discharged through bankruptcy proceedings. The U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants stating that while Congress had power over bankruptcies throughout the United States as per Article I Section 8 Clause IV of US Constitution and can limit states' ability to enforce their own laws against debtors during or after bankruptcy proceedings; it hadn’t done so explicitly regarding such penalties imposed by State motor vehicle codes thus far. Therefore until Congress did so specifically or generally applicable provisions were interpreted differently than they had been till then - state laws like those challenged here would not be overridden.

In the dissenting opinion for Boteler v. Ingels, Justice Black argued that California's requirement for a fee to replace license plates lost in bankruptcy proceedings was not an attempt to collect a debt but rather a charge for services rendered by the state. He maintained that this did not violate federal law prohibiting states from imposing financial obligations on those who have declared bankruptcy because it was not an effort to circumvent their discharged debts. Instead, he viewed it as part of the state's right to regulate motor vehicles and ensure public safety through proper identification of cars on its roads. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority ruling that such fees were unconstitutional under federal bankruptcy laws.