In the United States Supreme Court case of The United States v. One Hundred and Twelve Casks of Sugar, Nathan Goodale Claimant, the court was asked to decide whether or not a shipment of sugar seized by customs officers from an American vessel should be forfeited as contraband goods. At issue was whether or not the sugar had been imported into the country in violation of federal law prohibiting such imports without payment of duty. The claimant argued that he had purchased it in good faith from a foreign port prior to its seizure and thus did not owe any duties on it. However, after reviewing all evidence presented before them, including testimony from witnesses who were present at both ports during loading and unloading operations for this particular cargo shipment, the court found that there was sufficient proof that no duty had been paid on this importation and therefore ruled against Mr. Goodale's claim; consequently ordering forfeiture of said cargoes to government authorities for destruction according to law.

In the case of The United States v. One Hundred and Twelve Casks of Sugar, Nathan Goodale Claimant, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether or not a federal law that imposed duties on imported sugar applied to goods already in transit before it took effect. Justice McLean wrote a dissenting opinion arguing that Congress had no authority to impose such duties retroactively because doing so would be an unconstitutional exercise of power. He argued that if Congress were allowed to do this, then they could pass laws which would have effects beyond their own jurisdiction and violate other states' rights by interfering with commerce between them. Furthermore, he argued that even though there may be some public benefit from imposing these taxes retroactively, it does not justify violating constitutional principles as established by prior cases like Gibbons v Ogden (1824). In conclusion, Justice McLean believed that allowing Congress to impose taxes on goods already in transit violated both state sovereignty and individual liberty protected under the Constitution.