In the case of Thompson, the Supreme Court ruled that a state cannot pass laws which interfere with contracts made between individuals. The plaintiff had entered into an agreement to purchase land from another individual in Georgia and was unable to complete payment due to a law passed by the state legislature which prohibited such transactions. The court held that this law violated Article 1 Section 10 of the United States Constitution, as it interfered with private contractual agreements and thus could not be enforced. This ruling established precedent for future cases involving similar issues regarding states passing legislation interfering with private contracts.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in The Thompson, arguing that the majority's decision was an unconstitutional expansion of federal power. He argued that Congress had no authority to pass a law regulating navigation on navigable waters within state boundaries and that such regulation should be left up to individual states. Furthermore, he argued that even if Congress did have such authority, it could not constitutionally extend its reach beyond what is necessary for carrying out its enumerated powers. In his view, this case involved only intrastate commerce and thus fell outside of congressional jurisdiction. Justice Field concluded by asserting that allowing Congress to regulate intrastate commerce would lead to "the destruction of all local government."