In the case of International Paper Co. v. Ouellette et al., 1986, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a Vermont couple could not use state law to sue a New York paper mill for polluting Lake Champlain, which borders both states. The court held that only federal common law could be used in such cases and since Congress had passed the Clean Water Act (CWA), it intended to pre-empt federal common law suits as well. Therefore, any pollution-related disputes must be resolved under this act's provisions rather than through individual state nuisance laws or other legal avenues outside of CWA's framework. This decision reinforced the authority of federal environmental legislation over state laws in matters concerning interstate water pollution.

In the dissenting opinion for International Paper Co. v. Ouellette et al., Justice William Brennan, joined by Justices Thurgood Marshall and John Paul Stevens, argued that the majority's interpretation of the Clean Water Act was too narrow and failed to adequately protect states' rights to regulate pollution within their borders. They contended that while Congress intended for federal law to set a floor on environmental standards, it did not intend to prevent states from setting stricter regulations if they chose. The dissenters also disagreed with the majority's conclusion that Vermont could only apply its own laws at point source locations in New York; instead, they believed Vermont should be able to enforce its laws against any polluter causing harm within its borders regardless of where the pollution originated from.