The Trustees of the Wabash and Erie Canal Company brought a case against Beers in 1862. The dispute was over whether or not the canal company had an exclusive right to use certain navigable waters for their transportation purposes. The Supreme Court ruled that while Congress has authority to regulate interstate commerce, it does not have the power to grant exclusive rights on navigable waters unless they are necessary for public safety or convenience. Furthermore, any such grants must be made with due regard for existing private property rights and interests. This ruling established that states retain control over waterways within their borders even if those waterways are used by vessels engaged in interstate commerce, thus affirming state sovereignty over navigation laws and regulations concerning rivers shared between two or more states.

In Trustees of the Wabash and Erie Canal Company v. Beers, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state court had jurisdiction to issue an injunction against creditors of a corporation chartered by another state. The majority opinion held that it did not have such authority, as it would be in violation of Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution which states that "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings" from other states. However, Justice Grier dissented on this point arguing that while he agreed with much of what was stated in the majority opinion regarding full faith and credit between states being necessary for interstate commerce to function properly; however he argued that allowing one state's courts to enjoin creditors from another would not necessarily violate this principle as long as there is no interference with proceedings already underway or judgments already rendered by courts within those respective jurisdictions. He further argued that if Congress were allowed to pass laws granting such power then they should also provide remedies for any violations thereof so as not interfere too greatly with individual rights or cause undue hardship upon citizens who may find themselves subject thereto without due process protections afforded them under law.