In Ex Parte Jesse Hoyt, Collector of the Port of New York, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a case involving an 1833 act that imposed duties on goods imported into the United States. The court held that Congress had authority to impose such duties and could do so without violating any constitutional provisions. Furthermore, it was determined that even if some of these taxes were deemed unconstitutional by a state court or other tribunal, they would still be valid under federal law. Additionally, it was found that Congress had power to delegate its taxing authority to executive officers like Hoyt in order for them to collect revenue from imports as well as enforce laws related thereto. This decision established important precedent regarding congressional taxation powers and their ability to delegate those powers when necessary.

In Ex Parte Jesse Hoyt, Collector of the Port of New York (1839), Justice McLean wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that Congress had no power to pass laws regulating foreign commerce. He believed that such regulation was within the exclusive purview of the states and not subject to federal control. Furthermore, he argued that if Congress did have this authority then it would be unconstitutional as it would violate both Article I Section 8 Clause 3 and Amendment X of the Constitution. In his view, these clauses gave only limited powers to Congress with respect to foreign commerce while reserving all other matters for state governments or individuals. As such, any attempt by Congress to regulate foreign trade beyond what is specifically enumerated in those clauses should be considered an unconstitutional exercise of power outside its scope under the Constitution.