In Bradley v. City of Richmond (1912), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city, upholding its right to regulate and control public utilities within its jurisdiction. The case was brought forward by Mr. Bradley who owned a waterworks company that supplied water to parts of Richmond, Virginia. He argued that an ordinance passed by the city council which regulated rates charged for water services infringed upon his constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause as it deprived him of property without just compensation. The court disagreed with Bradley’s argument stating that while private property could not be taken for public use without fair compensation, this principle did not apply when a municipality exercised regulatory powers over businesses affected with a public interest such as utilities providing essential services like water supply. It held that cities have inherent power to regulate rates charged by such companies operating within their limits in order to protect citizens from unreasonable or discriminatory charges.

In the dissenting opinion for Bradley v. City of Richmond, it was argued that the city's decision to segregate its schools by race did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenters believed that while this amendment guarantees equal protection under law, it does not necessarily mandate racial integration in public institutions such as schools. They asserted that separate but equal facilities were constitutionally permissible and could satisfy the requirements of equality stipulated in the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, they contended that local authorities should have discretion over their educational policies without federal interference unless there is clear evidence of inequality or discrimination beyond mere separation based on race.