Gibbons v. Ogden Decision Question?

I would not say the decision rested upon prior laws. It was argued as a Constitutional interpretation question. Does commerce among the states include activities in the interior of a state? Does commerce refer to the goods or some broader definition? Can the state law regulating transportation coexist with the federal law, (even if they have some conflict)?

Here the Court decided that among the states really reaches inside the states The Court decided that commerce should be construed broadly to include more than just goods. Those are Article I questions and the Court rested its decision squarely on Article I. As the the coexistence of state law with federal, the Court without explicitly referring to it, invoked the Supremacy Clause, in striking down the state laws that conflicted with the federal laws and infringed upon federal sole authority to regulate in this area.

Webster's argument was squarely based upon the interpretation of the Constitution (that was accepted by the Court).

BB King vs Hedda Hopper