The U.S. Supreme Court case Federal Power Commission v. Southern California Edison Co., et al., 1963, revolved around the jurisdiction of the Federal Power Commission (FPC) over licensing power projects on federal lands and navigable waters. The FPC had denied a license to Southern California Edison Company for a hydroelectric project in part because it was not located on "navigable waters." The company argued that this decision exceeded the commission's authority as defined by the Federal Power Act, which only gave them control over such waters. However, upon review, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the FPC stating that their jurisdiction extended beyond just navigable waterways but also included all public lands and reservations under United States control. This ruling clarified and expanded federal regulatory powers regarding energy production facilities.

In the dissenting opinion for Federal Power Commission v. Southern California Edison Co., Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold federal jurisdiction over wholesale electricity rates in interstate commerce was a misinterpretation of both the Federal Power Act and previous court rulings. He believed that Congress intended for state regulatory commissions, not federal agencies, to have primary control over these matters. According to him, this interpretation is supported by past cases where courts upheld states' rights to regulate utilities within their borders without interference from federal authorities unless there were clear indications of Congressional intent otherwise. Furthermore, he contended that allowing such broad federal oversight could lead to unnecessary bureaucracy and inefficiency in regulating utility rates.