In the case of K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., et al., 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether federal law allowed for trademark owners to block parallel imports (goods produced abroad and imported without permission from a domestic trademark owner). The court held that it did not violate any laws if retailers such as K-Mart purchased genuine goods overseas at lower prices and then sold them in the United States under their original trademarks without obtaining consent from U.S. trademark holders like Cartier or Montres Rolex S.A.. However, they also ruled that Customs could exclude foreign-made goods bearing an American company's name unless authorized by its US representative - this decision effectively upheld restrictions on "gray market" imports.

In the dissenting opinion for K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with both legislative intent and previous court rulings regarding trademark law. He contended that Congress intended to protect American companies from foreign competition by allowing them to register their trademarks in the United States, even if those trademarks were already registered abroad by different entities. Furthermore, he asserted that this protection extended to gray market goods - items legally produced abroad under a U.S.-registered trademark but imported without consent of the U.S. rights holder - which should be excluded from importation into America unless explicitly authorized by domestic rights holders. The majority’s ruling would undermine these protections and disrupt established business practices based on long-standing interpretations of trademark laws.