In the United States v. California case of 1977, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government regarding a dispute over offshore mineral rights. The state of California claimed ownership and control over three miles off its coast, arguing that it had historically exercised jurisdiction there. However, the U.S. government contended that under international law and national policy, it held paramount rights to this area for purposes such as defense or commerce regulation. The court agreed with the federal argument based on precedents set by previous cases (United States v. Texas and United States v Louisiana). It concluded that although states may have some authority within their boundaries extending into sea waters for certain local concerns like fishing or navigation regulations, they do not possess exclusive economic privileges such as oil drilling rights in these zones without express congressional consent.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. California, the justices argued that the majority's decision to allow federal regulation of state lands three miles offshore was an overreach of federal power. They contended that this ruling violated states' rights and sovereignty as outlined in the Constitution. The dissenters believed that each state should have control over its own coastal waters up to a certain limit, beyond which international law would apply. They also expressed concern about potential negative impacts on states' economies due to loss of revenue from oil drilling and other activities within these waters if they were under federal control. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of historical precedents regarding jurisdiction over territorial seas.