In the case of McGee v. International Life Insurance Co., 1957, Mrs. Lulu McGee filed a lawsuit against International Life Insurance Company for refusing to pay her insurance claim after her son's death. The company was based in Texas while Mrs. McGee resided in California and argued that it had no substantial contacts with California, therefore the state court lacked jurisdiction over them under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mrs.McGee stating that even though the company did not have physical presence or conducted regular business activities within California, they still created "substantial connection" by delivering an insurance policy into the state and receiving premiums from there which is enough to establish personal jurisdiction over them according to minimum contact principle. This landmark decision expanded states' power to exercise their judicial authority over out-of-state defendants when certain minimum contacts are present between defendant and forum state thus providing greater protection for consumers who enter contracts with out-of-state companies.

In the dissenting opinion for McGee v. International Life Insurance Co., Justice Frankfurter argued that the decision of the majority expanded state jurisdiction beyond reasonable limits, violating principles of due process. He contended that California's assertion of jurisdiction over a Texas-based company based on one contract with a California resident was an excessive exercise of power. The justice emphasized that such broad interpretation could lead to states asserting their authority in cases where they have minimal interest or involvement, potentially infriting upon other states' rights and creating conflicts between jurisdictions. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential negative impacts on interstate commerce if businesses had to navigate differing laws and regulations across all 50 states simply because they entered into contracts with residents there.