The U.S. Supreme Court case Forbes Pioneer Boat Line v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District in 1921 revolved around a dispute over the use and control of navigable waters within Florida's Everglades Drainage District. The plaintiff, Forbes Pioneer Boat Line, argued that the state had no right to obstruct or interfere with navigation on these waterways for drainage purposes without providing compensation for any resulting damages to private parties who relied on these routes for commerce. However, the court ruled in favor of the defendant, stating that under its police power and duty as trustee of public rights in navigable waters, a state could make reasonable regulations regarding their use and development without being liable for compensation unless it completely deprived an individual or corporation from all profitable uses thereof.

In the dissenting opinion for Forbes Pioneer Boat Line v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District, Justice McReynolds expressed his disagreement with the majority's ruling that a state could impose tolls on interstate commerce without violating the Commerce Clause. He argued that such an interpretation was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court rulings and undermined federal authority over interstate commerce. According to him, allowing states to charge fees for use of navigable waterways would result in a patchwork system where each state set its own rules and rates, potentially hindering free trade among states. Furthermore, he contended that if this power were left unchecked it could lead to excessive or discriminatory charges which might favor local interests at the expense of out-of-state businesses or individuals using these waterways for commercial purposes.