In the 1938 case of Carrier et al. v. Bryant, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and inheritance laws within Native American tribes, specifically the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. The plaintiffs were heirs of an original allottee who had died intestate in 1916, while defendant was a purchaser from other heirs at law. The issue revolved around whether Oklahoma state law or tribal customs should govern inheritance issues for these tribes under their treaties with the U.S government. The court ruled that Congress intended to subject these lands to state probate laws when it provided for allotment patents in fee simple without restrictions on alienation (transfer). Therefore, Oklahoma's descent and distribution statutes applied rather than tribal custom or federal nonintercourse acts protecting Indian property rights. This decision effectively allowed states more control over Native American affairs by applying state laws to matters traditionally governed by tribal customs or federal legislation specific to indigenous peoples.

The dissenting opinion in the Carrier et al. v. Bryant case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring truckers to obtain certificates of convenience and necessity was incorrect, as it violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by allowing states to regulate interstate commerce excessively. The dissenting justices believed this ruling could lead to protectionist policies where each state would favor its own businesses over those from other states, disrupting free trade among them. They also expressed concern about potential discrimination against out-of-state companies and warned that such laws might be used for economic protectionism rather than public welfare purposes they were ostensibly designed for.