In the case of Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Georgia Public Service Commission et al., 1934, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Aero Mayflower Transit Company, a moving company that operated across state lines. The Georgia Public Service Commission had attempted to regulate and license its operations within the state, but Aero argued this was an infringement on interstate commerce laws which were under federal jurisdiction. The court agreed with Aero's argument that their business constituted interstate commerce and thus could not be regulated by individual states' public service commissions or similar bodies. This ruling reinforced the principle that only Congress has authority over interstate commerce as per Article I Section 8 Clause 3 (the Commerce Clause) of the United States Constitution.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Georgia Public Service Commission, Justice Stone argued that the state's regulation of interstate commerce was not unconstitutional as long as it did not conflict with federal law or impede its operation. He believed that states should be able to regulate aspects of interstate commerce when there is no existing federal legislation on the matter and if such regulations do not interfere with free trade between states. In this specific case, he disagreed with the majority's view that Georgia’s requirement for a certificate of public convenience and necessity from out-of-state moving companies was an undue burden on interstate commerce. Instead, he saw it as a legitimate exercise of state power to protect its citizens from unscrupulous business practices in absence of any conflicting federal regulation.