The U.S. Supreme Court case Consolidated Rail Corporation et al. v. National Association of Recycling Industries, Inc., et al., 1980 revolved around the issue of whether a federal agency has the authority to approve or disapprove tariffs filed by rail carriers that aim to limit their liability for damages occurring during transportation. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had approved such a tariff filed by Conrail, which was challenged by the National Association of Recycling Industries (NARI). NARI argued that this approval exceeded ICC's statutory authority and violated shippers' rights under common law. However, in its decision, the Supreme Court upheld ICC's approval stating it fell within its broad power over railroad rates and practices under Interstate Commerce Act. It also held that while common-law rules might generally apply to carrier liability issues unless displaced by valid federal laws or regulations; here they were displaced as Congress intended for ICC to have comprehensive control over these matters.

In the dissenting opinion for Consolidated Rail Corporation v. National Association of Recycling Industries, Inc., Justice Brennan argued that the Court's decision to uphold a federal agency's power to regulate railroad rates without considering antitrust laws was misguided. He contended that this ruling ignored Congress' intent in passing both the Interstate Commerce Act and various antitrust statutes. According to him, these laws were designed not only to prevent unfair business practices but also promote competition within industries - an objective he believed would be undermined by allowing unchecked regulatory authority over rail freight prices. Furthermore, Justice Brennan expressed concern about potential harm caused by monopolistic pricing on small businesses and consumers alike if such regulation went unchallenged under antitrust law principles.