In the case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Stude et al., 1953, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state could regulate interstate commerce in instances where federal law did not explicitly do so. The dispute arose when an Iowa-based railroad company refused to comply with Texas's regulations regarding loading and unloading freight cars within a specified time frame. The railroad company argued that as an entity involved in interstate commerce, it should only be subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The court ruled against this argument stating that states have authority over local aspects of interstate commerce until Congress decides otherwise or unless such control conflicts with national policy or interests. Therefore, Texas had every right to enforce its laws on railroads operating within its borders even if they were engaged in activities related to interstate trade.

In the dissenting opinion for Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Stude et al., Justice Jackson disagreed with the majority's decision that a railroad company could be held liable for damages to goods in transit due to theft by third parties, even when it had taken reasonable precautions against such occurrences. He argued that this ruling effectively made railroads insurers of the goods they transported and placed an undue burden on them. Furthermore, he contended that this interpretation was not consistent with previous court rulings or legislative intent regarding common carrier liability laws. Instead, he suggested that liability should only apply if negligence could be proven on part of the railroad company.