In the case of Isaac R. Smith, owner of the sloop Volant v. The State of Maryland, Smith was challenging a fine imposed by the state for violating its navigation laws. Specifically, he argued that his vessel had been wrongfully seized and fined because it did not meet certain requirements under Maryland law regarding registration and licensing fees for vessels operating in their waters. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Smith on this issue, ruling that while states have broad authority to regulate navigable waters within their borders they cannot impose fines or other penalties without due process protections such as notice and an opportunity to be heard before any action is taken against them. This decision established important precedent protecting individuals from arbitrary enforcement actions by government entities which must follow proper procedures when imposing sanctions or punishments on citizens who violate laws or regulations.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Isaac R. Smith, Owner of the Sloop Volant v. The State of Maryland argued that a state law which imposed a tax on vessels entering its ports was unconstitutional and violated the Commerce Clause. Justice Grier wrote that Congress had exclusive authority to regulate commerce between states and with foreign nations, and any attempt by individual states to interfere with this power would be invalidated as unconstitutional under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. He further argued that even if it were assumed for argument's sake that such taxes could be constitutionally imposed by individual states, they must still comply with certain requirements: namely, they must not discriminate against interstate commerce or impose an undue burden upon it; nor should they favor local interests over those from other parts of the country. In this case, he found no evidence suggesting either requirement had been met since there was nothing preventing out-of-state vessels from being taxed at higher rates than those owned within Maryland’s borders or vice versa; thus making them subject to discrimination based solely on their origin rather than their actual value or use within Maryland waters.