In the case of United States v. Texas, 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over ownership of submerged lands in the Gulf of Mexico between federal and state authorities. The State of Texas claimed that it owned all submerged lands out to three marine leagues (approximately nine nautical miles) from its coast based on historical boundaries at the time it joined the Union in 1845. However, under federal law established by Submerged Lands Act (SLA), coastal states were generally granted only up to three geographical miles from their coasts while rest belonged to Federal Government. The court held that when Texas entered into union, there was no clear agreement about extending its boundary beyond three geographical miles into sea and hence SLA applies here too which limits state's claim upto three geographical mile only instead of three marine leagues as claimed by Texas. This decision clarified jurisdictional rights over offshore resources such as oil and gas reserves between states and federal government along US coastline.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Texas, 1992, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling against federal regulations on low-level radioactive waste disposal infringed upon states' rights. The dissenters believed that Congress had overstepped its bounds by forcing states to take ownership of such waste if they did not comply with federal standards or form interstate compacts for shared disposal sites. They contended this violated principles of dual sovereignty and commandeered state governments into enforcing federal regulatory programs, which is unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the "take title" provision as a mere incentive rather than coercion; in their view, it functionally compelled states into service of federal interests and thus represented an unlawful intrusion on state autonomy.