In the United States v. Twin City Power Co., et al., 1955, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights and federal power over navigable waters. The case arose when Twin City Power Company began dredging sand and gravel from the Savannah River's bed without obtaining permission from Congress or any other federal agency. The U.S government sued to stop this activity, arguing that it had exclusive control over all navigable waters in America under its Commerce Clause powers. Twin City countered by asserting that they owned the riverbed because of "King's Grants" dating back to colonial times which gave them title to both banks of the river and everything beneath up until midstream. They also argued that their activities did not interfere with navigation. The Supreme Court sided with the government, ruling unanimously against Twin City Power Co.. It held that regardless of who owns submerged lands under navigable waterways, no one can exploit these resources without congressional approval as per Article I Section 8 Clause 3 (Commerce Clause) of US Constitution. This decision reinforced federal authority over nation’s waterways.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Twin City Power Co., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a federal license requirement for hydroelectric power projects on non-navigable tributaries of navigable waters expanded federal authority too broadly. The dissenters believed this interpretation went beyond what Congress intended when drafting the Federal Water Power Act, which they saw as primarily concerned with navigation and interstate commerce rather than local water resources or power generation. They also raised concerns about potential infringement upon states' rights, arguing that under this ruling, any stream capable of producing electricity could be subject to federal control regardless of its location or impact on interstate commerce. This would effectively give the Federal Government regulatory authority over all bodies of water in every state - an outcome they found unacceptable.