In the case of New Orleans Flour Inspectors v. Glover, 1895, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Glover. The dispute arose when a group of flour inspectors from New Orleans sued Glover for unpaid inspection fees on imported flour. They argued that under Louisiana state law they were entitled to these fees even though federal law exempted imported goods from such charges. However, the court held that federal laws superseded state laws in matters related to foreign commerce and thus dismissed their claim. The decision reaffirmed the supremacy clause of the Constitution which states that Federal Law is supreme over State Law when there's a conflict between them regarding interstate or international trade issues. This ruling also emphasized how important it was for uniformity in regulations concerning foreign commerce across all states so as not to disrupt or hinder national economic interests.

In the dissenting opinion for New Orleans Flour Inspectors v. Glover, Justice Brewer expressed concern over the potential implications of this ruling on state power. He argued that while it is important to protect interstate commerce from undue burdens, it is equally essential to respect states' rights in regulating their internal affairs. In his view, Louisiana's law requiring inspection of flour was a reasonable exercise of its police powers and did not interfere with interstate commerce because it applied equally to all flour sold within the state regardless of origin. Furthermore, he contended that such laws are necessary for public health and safety as they ensure product quality standards are met before goods reach consumers. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's decision declaring this law unconstitutional.