In the 1943 case of Consumers Import Co. et al. v. Kabushiki Kaisha Kawasaki Zosenjo et al., the U.S Supreme Court addressed a dispute over contract obligations and damages related to shipbuilding during World War I. The Japanese company, Kabushiki Kaisha Kawasaki Zosenjo, had agreed to build ships for an American company, Consumers Import Co., but was unable to fulfill this obligation due to restrictions imposed by the Japanese government at that time as part of their war effort. When sued for breach of contract by Consumers Import Co., they argued that performance became impossible due to these governmental actions which were beyond their control - a legal concept known as "force majeure". The court ruled in favor of Kawasaki stating that they could not be held liable because it was indeed impossible for them to perform under such circumstances.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Consumers Import Co. et al. v. Kabushiki Kaisha Kawasaki Zosenjo et al., argued that the majority's decision to dismiss the complaint was incorrect, as it failed to consider important aspects of international law and comity among nations. The dissent emphasized that a foreign corporation doing business within U.S jurisdiction should be held accountable for its actions under U.S laws, regardless of any potential diplomatic implications with Japan or other countries involved in World War II at that time. It further contended that dismissing this case on grounds of political question doctrine was inappropriate because it is not solely a matter for executive discretion but also involves judicial interpretation and application of legal principles such as contract law and torts which are traditionally within courts' purview.