In the case of Wetmore v. Tennessee Copper Company in 1910, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving air pollution crossing state lines. The plaintiff, Georgia resident Mr. Wetmore, claimed that sulfur dioxide emissions from Tennessee Copper Company's operations were causing damage to his property in Georgia and sought an injunction against the company to stop it from polluting his land. The defendant argued that because its operations were located entirely within Tennessee, it was not subject to regulation by another state or liable for damages caused outside of its home state. However, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., writing for a unanimous court, rejected this argument and held that states have a right under common law principles to protect their residents from transboundary pollution harm originating in other states. Therefore, he granted an injunction requiring the copper company to cease emitting harmful gases across state lines into Georgia.

In the dissenting opinion for Wetmore v. Tennessee Copper Company, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to grant an injunction against a copper company in Georgia that was causing air pollution damage in Tennessee. He argued that while it is true that states have rights and can suffer wrongs like individuals, they cannot be equated to private parties when seeking redress from another state. In his view, this case should not have been treated as a dispute between two private entities but rather as one involving interstate relations which required diplomatic resolution or intervention by Congress. Furthermore, he believed there were no sufficient grounds for granting an injunction since damages could adequately compensate for any harm caused by the defendant’s actions.