In the 1906 case of Kansas v. United States, the state of Kansas filed a lawsuit against the federal government over issues related to interstate commerce and alcohol regulation. The dispute arose when Kansas enacted laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors within its borders, but faced challenges enforcing these laws due to liquor being shipped into Kansas from other states. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government, stating that only Congress has jurisdiction over interstate commerce under Article I Section 8 Clause 3 (the Commerce Clause) of U.S Constitution. Therefore, it was beyond a state's power to regulate or interfere with goods transported across state lines once they had arrived at their destination for use or consumption by individuals who obtained them legally according to local law.

In the dissenting opinion for Kansas v. United States, 1906, Justice Harlan argued that the federal government had overstepped its bounds by interfering in a state's internal affairs. He believed that states should have full authority to regulate their own liquor laws without interference from Congress or any other federal institution. The majority ruling held that the Wilson Act gave Congress power to regulate interstate commerce of alcohol even after it reached its destination; however, Justice Harlan disagreed with this interpretation and felt it was an infringement on states' rights as protected by the Tenth Amendment. In his view, once goods entered into a state and were no longer part of interstate commerce, they fell under exclusive jurisdiction of said state’s police powers unless explicitly stated otherwise in the Constitution.