In the case of Vermont v. Cox, 1987, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a state could impose its own restrictions on interstate commerce in order to protect public health and safety. The issue arose when Vermont attempted to regulate the transportation of hazardous waste through its territory by requiring permits for such activity. A company named Cox refused to comply with these regulations, arguing that they were unconstitutional because they interfered with interstate commerce. The court ruled in favor of Vermont, stating that while states cannot typically interfere with interstate commerce (a power reserved for Congress), there are exceptions when it comes to protecting public health and safety. In this instance, the court found that Vermont's regulation was not discriminatory or protectionist but rather aimed at ensuring safe transport of hazardous materials within its borders. This decision affirmed states' rights under certain circumstances where federal law does not provide clear guidance or rules regarding an issue related directly to citizens' welfare within their jurisdiction.

In the dissenting opinion for Vermont v. Cox, the justice argued that the majority's decision to uphold a warrantless search of an automobile based on probable cause was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court rulings and violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. The justice contended that there were no exigent circumstances justifying a departure from standard procedure requiring law enforcement officers to obtain a warrant before conducting such searches. They also disagreed with the majority's assertion that automobiles are inherently less private than homes, arguing this distinction is not supported by precedent or logic. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuses of power by law enforcement if given too much discretion in determining when it is reasonable to conduct warrantless searches.