The United States v. Louisiana et al., also known as the Texas Boundary Case, was a Supreme Court case in 1968 that dealt with territorial boundaries and jurisdiction over coastal waters. The dispute arose when several Gulf states claimed ownership of offshore lands rich in oil reserves, extending their claims up to three marine leagues (approximately nine nautical miles) into the Gulf of Mexico from their coastline. However, the federal government argued that it had exclusive rights over these areas under international law principles and U.S legislation such as Submerged Lands Act (1953). The court ruled in favor of the federal government stating that each state's boundary extends only three geographical miles into open sea from its coastline or seaward limit inland waterways according to international laws unless Congress decides otherwise for national defense or foreign policy reasons. This decision significantly limited states' control over valuable natural resources off their coasts while expanding federal authority.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Louisiana et al., Justice Black disagreed with the majority's decision to grant Texas ownership of offshore lands up to three marine leagues from its coast, arguing that it was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar cases involving other states. He contended that this ruling gave preferential treatment to Texas over other coastal states by granting it a larger share of submerged lands and their valuable resources than those given to any other state under the Submerged Lands Act (SLA). According to him, all coastal states should be treated equally in terms of their territorial waters' boundaries. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential international disputes arising from such an expansive claim over offshore territories.