In the case of New York Life Insurance Co. v. Jackson et al., 1937, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a life insurance policy could be considered property in bankruptcy proceedings and thus subject to seizure by creditors. The court ruled that under federal law, an unmatured life insurance policy held by a bankrupt individual is not regarded as property and therefore cannot be seized for payment of debts during bankruptcy proceedings. This decision upheld previous rulings which protected such policies from being claimed by creditors, thereby safeguarding individuals' rights to maintain their life insurance coverage even when facing financial hardship or insolvency.

In the dissenting opinion for New York Life Insurance Co. v. Jackson, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law regulating insurance contracts contradicted previous Supreme Court rulings which held such laws as unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce. The dissenters contended that insurance transactions are not merely local affairs but involve numerous states and thus should be considered interstate commerce subject to federal regulation rather than individual state control. They also expressed concern about potential negative impacts on policyholders and insurers due to inconsistent regulations across different states, arguing this could lead to confusion and instability in the industry. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of congressional silence on this issue as consent for state regulation, asserting instead that Congress simply had not yet chosen to exercise its power over this area of commerce.