The U.S. Supreme Court case New Jersey v. Delaware in 1934 was a dispute over the boundary line between the two states, specifically regarding riparian rights to portions of the Delaware River and Bay. The disagreement arose when New Jersey granted land under water for oyster cultivation without consulting Delaware, who claimed ownership of said lands based on colonial charters dating back to 1682 and 1701. The court ruled that while both states had certain jurisdictional rights over their respective shores, it did not extend into or across the river itself which remained common territory open for navigation by all parties involved. Therefore, any grants made by either state extending beyond low-water mark were deemed invalid unless consented upon by both states beforehand.

In the dissenting opinion for New Jersey v. Delaware, Justice Stone disagreed with the majority's ruling that granted Delaware sovereignty over a portion of the riverbed in dispute. He argued that historical evidence and past rulings did not support this decision. According to him, both states had equal rights to navigate and fish in these waters since their inception as colonies under English rule. Furthermore, he pointed out that previous court decisions had established a boundary line down the middle of such bodies of water when two states were involved unless there was clear evidence showing one state held exclusive jurisdiction from its colonial charter or subsequent treaties or statutes. In his view, no such proof existed here; hence New Jersey should have been given joint jurisdiction over this area along with Delaware rather than being excluded entirely.