In the case of Federal Trade Commission v. Texaco Inc., 1968, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC had accused Texaco Inc. and other oil companies of violating antitrust laws by fixing prices for gasoline sold to independent dealers at artificially high levels. The court found that these practices constituted a "restraint of trade" under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and were therefore illegal. This decision was significant as it affirmed that large corporations could not use their market power to manipulate prices or engage in anti-competitive behavior, thereby protecting smaller businesses and consumers from unfair pricing practices.

In the dissenting opinion for Federal Trade Commission v. Texaco Inc., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold FTC's cease and desist order against Texaco was based on a misinterpretation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The dissenting justices believed that this section should not be used to prohibit practices which are merely unfair in some abstract sense, but rather those which cause substantial injury to competition or consumers. They contended that there was no evidence showing such harm resulting from Texaco’s consignment agreement with independent dealers, nor any indication of an anti-competitive effect or consumer detriment due to higher prices or reduced choices. Moreover, they pointed out that similar arrangements were common in other industries and had been deemed lawful by courts before this case. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's broad interpretation of "unfair methods of competition" and its application in this case.