In the 1926 case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between several railway companies and the federal government regarding freight rates for transporting goods across state lines. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had ordered reduced rates in response to complaints from shippers that existing charges were excessive and discriminatory. The railroads argued that these new rates were too low to allow them reasonable earnings and violated their rights under the Fifth Amendment's due process clause. However, after examining evidence presented by both sides, including detailed financial data from the railways themselves, Justice Willis Van Devanter delivered an unanimous decision upholding ICC's rate reductions as justifiable regulatory measures within its authority over interstate commerce. He concluded they did not infrally upon railroad companies' constitutional rights since they still allowed for fair returns on investment.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company v. United States, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) overstepped its authority by ordering railroads to establish through routes and joint rates without first determining whether existing arrangements were unjust or unreasonable. The dissenting justices believed this action violated both statutory law and due process rights under the Constitution. They contended that while Congress granted ICC power to ensure just and reasonable railroad practices, it did not authorize them to create new business relationships between independent companies based on their own notions of public convenience or necessity. Furthermore, they asserted that such orders could potentially force railroads into unwanted partnerships with competitors which might lead to financial loss or even bankruptcy - a clear violation of property rights protected by Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.