In the 1938 case of Driscoll et al., Constituting Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, et al. v. Edison Light & Power Co., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Edison Light & Power Company (EL&P). The court held that EL&P was not required to provide free electricity to streetlights owned by a borough within its service area as mandated by an earlier franchise agreement because it violated state law which prohibited utilities from providing free services. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission had previously ordered EL&P to continue supplying power for free based on this franchise agreement, but the Supreme Court overruled this decision stating that such agreements were null and void under state law. This ruling reinforced the principle that public utility companies cannot be compelled into unfair contracts or obligations without just compensation.

In the dissenting opinion for Driscoll et al., Constituting Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, et al. v. Edison Light & Power Co., Justice Black argued that the majority's decision to strike down a state law as unconstitutional was an overreach of judicial power. He contended that it is not within the Court's purview to determine whether or not a business has been deprived of its property without due process based on their interpretation of what constitutes fair value in rate-making processes. Instead, he believed this should be left up to legislative bodies and administrative agencies who are better equipped with expert knowledge and understanding about these complex economic issues. Furthermore, he expressed concern that such decisions could potentially undermine public confidence in regulatory institutions by suggesting they lack fairness or impartiality when setting rates for utilities companies.