In the case of Washington et al. v. General Motors Corp. et al., 1971, the Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a state could impose its own safety standards on automobile manufacturers, or if this power rested solely with the federal government under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (the "Safety Act"). The State of Washington had enacted legislation requiring all new cars sold in the state to be equipped with seat belts for every passenger seat as well as other specific safety features not required by federal law at that time. General Motors and other auto manufacturers sued, arguing that such requirements were preempted by federal law which only mandated seat belts for front seats. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of General Motors, holding that states cannot enact their own vehicle safety standards when those standards are different from or additional to existing federal regulations under the Safety Act. This decision affirmed an earlier ruling by a lower court which held that Congress intended for there to be uniform national motor vehicle safety standards and did not intend for individual states to supplement these rules with their own unique requirements.

In the dissenting opinion for Washington et al. v. General Motors Corp. et al., it was argued that the majority's decision to dismiss the case on grounds of lack of standing and ripeness was incorrect, as these doctrines should not be used to avoid difficult or sensitive issues. The dissent believed that there were indeed substantial allegations made by petitioners which warranted a hearing in court, including claims about racial discrimination in employment practices at General Motors plants and its impact on African American communities where those plants are located. They also disagreed with the majority’s view that this issue is better addressed through legislative means rather than judicial intervention, arguing instead for an active role of courts in addressing societal problems like systemic racism.