In the United States v. Maine et al., 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining which entity - federal or state governments - held rightful jurisdiction over coastal waters and submerged lands along the Atlantic seaboard. The case arose after several states claimed ownership of these areas based on historical precedents dating back to colonial times. However, the court ruled in favor of federal jurisdiction under a principle known as paramountcy doctrine, asserting that only Congress has authority over such territories for purposes related to commerce, navigation and national defense among others. This decision effectively nullified any conflicting claims by individual states from Maine to Texas regarding control over offshore resources like oil and gas reserves found within three miles off their coasts.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Maine et al., 1974, it was argued that the majority's decision to grant exclusive rights of seabed and subsoil resources up to three miles from their coastlines to individual states contradicted historical precedent and international law. The dissenters believed that these resources should be considered federal property due to their location in federally controlled waters. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how the court interpreted past rulings on similar issues, arguing that they had previously recognized such offshore areas as under federal jurisdiction. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential conflicts between states over these valuable resources and warned against setting a dangerous precedent by allowing each state unilateral control over its adjacent seabed and subsoil resources.