In the case of New Jersey v. New York City in 1933, the Supreme Court was tasked with resolving a dispute between these two states over pollution caused by garbage disposal. The state of New Jersey sued New York City for dumping its waste into the ocean, which then washed up on the shores of New Jersey causing environmental damage and public health concerns. The court ruled in favor of New Jersey, stating that it had jurisdiction to protect its citizens from harm caused by another state's actions and ordered an injunction against further dumping by NYC until a suitable solution could be found. This decision marked one of many instances where federal courts have been called upon to mediate disputes between states regarding shared resources or cross-border impacts.

In the dissenting opinion for New Jersey v. New York City, Justice Cardozo disagreed with the majority's decision that allowed New York City to continue dumping garbage into the ocean. He argued that this practice was a public nuisance and violated principles of interstate comity. Furthermore, he contended that it is not enough for states to merely refrain from causing harm within their own borders; they must also respect other states' rights to enjoy their natural resources without interference or pollution from outside sources. In his view, allowing one state (New York) to pollute another state’s waters (New Jersey) contradicted these principles and should be prohibited by law.