The U.S. Supreme Court case Covington and Cincinnati Bridge Company v. Kentucky in 1893 revolved around the issue of whether a state could regulate rates for a bridge that spanned two states, thus involving interstate commerce. The Covington and Cincinnati Bridge Company had been chartered by both Ohio and Kentucky to build a bridge over the Ohio River, connecting the two states. However, when Kentucky attempted to set toll rates for crossing the bridge, it was challenged by the company on grounds that this constituted regulation of interstate commerce - something only Congress has authority over according to Article I Section 8 Clause 3 of Constitution (the Commerce Clause). The court ruled in favor of Kentucky stating that while Congress does have exclusive power over regulating interstate commerce, its failure or refusal to exercise this power leaves room for individual states to act within their own jurisdiction until such time as Congress chooses to intervene.

In the dissenting opinion for Covington and Cincinnati Bridge Company v. Kentucky, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings of the Court. He contended that a state does not have unlimited power to regulate commerce within its borders, particularly when it interferes with interstate commerce or infringes upon federal authority. In this case, he believed that Kentucky's regulation of toll rates on a bridge connecting two states constituted an interference with interstate commerce and thus fell under federal jurisdiction. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view that because Congress had not acted to regulate these specific tolls meant they were upholding state control over such matters; instead arguing silence from Congress should not be interpreted as approval of state action in areas traditionally controlled by federal law.