In the case of Sonneborn Brothers v. Cureton, Attorney General of Texas et al., 1922, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sonneborn Brothers, a New York-based oil company. The State of Texas had imposed a tax on all petroleum products leaving the state and claimed that this was not an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce because it was levied equally on both intrastate and interstate shipments. However, the court found that although technically applied to both types of shipment, in practice it disproportionately affected out-of-state businesses like Sonneborn Brothers who were primarily involved in interstate trade. Therefore, they concluded that this tax did indeed constitute an unfair burden on interstate commerce and thus violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution.

In the dissenting opinion for Sonneborn Brothers v. Cureton, it was argued that the Texas statute in question did not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as majority opined. The dissenting justices believed that this law was a legitimate exercise of state power to regulate and tax businesses operating within its borders, even if they were involved in interstate commerce. They contended that states should have broad latitude to manage their own economic affairs without federal interference unless there is clear evidence of discrimination against out-of-state entities or undue burden on interstate commerce which wasn't present here according to them. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority's interpretation of 'original package doctrine', arguing it shouldn't apply when goods are stored temporarily before being sold locally rather than immediately shipped out-of-state after importation.