The State of Rhode Island brought a complaint against the State of Massachusetts to the United States Supreme Court in 1833. Rhode Island argued that Massachusetts had violated its rights by claiming ownership over Narragansett Bay, which is located between both states. The court found that while Massachusetts did have some control over parts of the bay, it was not allowed to interfere with navigation or fishing rights held by Rhode Island citizens. Furthermore, any disputes regarding land boundaries were left up to Congress and could not be decided unilaterally by either state. Ultimately, this case established important precedents for how states must respect each other's sovereignty when dealing with shared resources such as bodies of water.

In the case of The State of Rhode Island v. The State of Massachusetts, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the Court should not have dismissed Rhode Island's complaint against Massachusetts. He maintained that it was within the power and jurisdiction of this court to decide upon questions between two states, as long as those questions did not involve political considerations or matters exclusively belonging to Congress. Furthermore, he believed that there were sufficient facts presented by Rhode Island for this court to make a decision on whether or not Massachusetts had violated its rights under an existing compact between them. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall felt strongly that since both parties had submitted their cases before this court with full confidence in its ability to render justice according to law and equity, it would be wrong for the Court now deny them such relief without any explanation whatsoever.