In the case of Atherton Mills v. Johnston et al., 1921, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a North Carolina law that allowed for double damages in cases where railroads failed to pay claims within a specified time period was constitutional. The plaintiff, Atherton Mills, had filed suit against Southern Railway Company (Johnston) after it failed to deliver cotton on time and did not compensate for losses incurred due to this delay. The lower court awarded double damages based on state law but this decision was appealed by Southern Railway Company arguing that such punitive measures were unconstitutional under federal commerce laws. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Southern Railway Company stating that while states have power over local matters including intrastate commerce, they cannot enact legislation which directly burdens or obstructs interstate commerce as it falls under federal jurisdiction. Therefore, the North Carolina statute allowing for double damages conflicted with national policy governing interstate carriers and thus violated the Commerce Clause of Constitution rendering it void.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Atherton Mills v. Johnston et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a North Carolina law limiting working hours for women was flawed. The dissenters believed that this law violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, as it discriminated based on sex and did not apply equally to all citizens. They contended that there was no substantial evidence proving women were physically weaker than men or incapable of making their own decisions about work hours. Moreover, they pointed out inconsistencies in how laws regulated labor conditions; while some states had similar restrictions for both sexes, others had none at all. This inconsistency suggested arbitrariness rather than a well-founded belief in female fragility or incapacity. Therefore, they concluded that such legislation should be considered unconstitutional unless compelling scientific evidence could demonstrate its necessity.