In the case of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company v. State of Arkansas in 1910, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving interstate commerce and state taxation powers. The railway company was an Illinois corporation operating railroads across several states including Arkansas where it owned property valued at $5 million but only paid taxes on $2 million worth of property due to exemptions granted by other states for its bonds held there. The State of Arkansas sought to tax all properties within its jurisdiction regardless of these exemptions leading to this litigation. The court upheld that while states cannot interfere with interstate commerce directly or indirectly through discriminatory taxation, they can levy non-discriminatory taxes on corporations doing business within their borders even if such businesses are involved in interstate commerce. Therefore, the court sided with the State of Arkansas stating that it had not violated any constitutional provisions by taxing all properties belonging to the railway company located within its boundaries irrespective of whether those assets were exempted from taxation elsewhere.

In the dissenting opinion for Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company v. State of Arkansas, it was argued that the state law in question did not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as majority opined. The dissenting justices believed that states should have authority to regulate aspects of interstate commerce when such regulation does not conflict with federal legislation or impede on national interests. They contended that this particular Arkansas statute requiring trains to stop at county seats did not interfere with interstate commerce but rather served a legitimate public interest by ensuring rural communities had access to transportation services. Therefore, they disagreed with striking down this law as unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce.