John C. Sinnott, Samuel Wolf, and James Sands brought a case against Gorham Davenport and other Commissioners of Pilotage of the Bay and Harbor of Mobile. The plaintiffs in error argued that they had been unlawfully excluded from piloting vessels into the port by the defendants' refusal to grant them certificates as pilots for said port. They sought an injunction restraining further proceedings on their exclusion until it could be determined whether or not they were entitled to such certificates under existing laws. The Supreme Court held that there was no legal authority for granting such relief since Congress had exclusive power over navigable waters within its jurisdiction, including those at Mobile harbor; thus any action taken by state authorities would be void if it conflicted with federal law or regulations concerning navigation in these waters. Furthermore, even if state legislation did exist which authorized the commissioners’ actions here complained of, this court found that it was unconstitutional because it violated due process rights guaranteed by both state constitutions and federal statutes regarding pilotage fees charged upon ships entering ports within their respective jurisdictions.

In the dissenting opinion of John C. Sinnott, Samuel Wolf, and James Sands v. Gorham Davenport and Others, the justices argued that a state law which allowed for pilotage fees to be charged on vessels entering Mobile Bay was unconstitutional under Article I Section 10 of the United States Constitution. The majority had ruled in favor of allowing such fees as they were deemed necessary for public safety; however, this dissent disagreed with their ruling by arguing that these fees constituted an undue burden on interstate commerce as it would add additional costs to goods being transported from one state to another across Mobile Bay. Furthermore, this dissent argued that since Congress has exclusive authority over regulating interstate commerce according to Article I Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution then any laws passed by states concerning such matters should be considered invalid unless approved by Congress first. In conclusion, while recognizing the importance of protecting public safety through reasonable regulations imposed upon maritime traffic within its borders each state must still adhere strictly to Constitutional limits when doing so or risk having those laws overturned in court due to unconstitutionality