The U.S. Supreme Court case Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Commission of California in 1925 revolved around the issue of whether a state could regulate and control private businesses that use public highways for transportation purposes, specifically focusing on trucking companies like Frost & Frost Trucking Co. The court ruled against the Railroad Commission of California, stating that it was unconstitutional to require private carriers to obtain certificates from a regulatory body before operating their business on public roads because this violated the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause by depriving them of their property without due process of law. This decision upheld the principle that while states have power to regulate industries for safety or welfare reasons, they cannot arbitrarily interfere with private business operations.

In the dissenting opinion for Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Commission of California, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's decision that a state regulation requiring truckers to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity was unconstitutional. He argued that such regulations were necessary to prevent destructive competition in the transportation industry and protect public safety on highways. Furthermore, he contended that states have broad powers under their police authority to regulate businesses operating within their borders, including those involved in interstate commerce as long as they do not conflict with federal laws or regulations. In his view, this case did not involve any such conflicts; therefore, it should be left up to individual states like California to decide how best to regulate its own industries.