In the case of Brimstone Railroad and Canal Company v. United States et al., 1927, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a railroad company had to pay for damages caused by its negligence during World War I under federal control. The Brimstone Railroad and Canal Company argued that they should not be held liable as they were operating under government control at the time. However, the court ruled against them stating that even though railroads were federally controlled during wartime, it did not exempt them from liability for their own negligent actions. This decision established an important precedent in terms of corporate responsibility while functioning under governmental direction or supervision.

In the dissenting opinion for Brimstone Railroad and Canal Company v. United States et al., it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have jurisdiction over intrastate commerce, which is under state control. The ICC's decision to lower rates on sulfur shipments within Louisiana was seen as an intrusion into state affairs. This case involved a small railroad company whose primary business was transporting sulfur from mines in Louisiana to a port in the same state - clearly intrastate commerce. The dissenters believed that while Congress has power over interstate commerce, this does not extend to controlling all aspects of transportation within individual states just because some part of those goods may eventually move across state lines or affect prices elsewhere due to market forces. They felt this interpretation would give federal authorities too much power at the expense of states' rights.