The U.S. Supreme Court case Grand Trunk Western Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana in 1910 revolved around the issue of whether a state could regulate interstate commerce, specifically regarding railway rates for intrastate and interstate travel. The Grand Trunk Western Railway Company challenged an order by the Railroad Commission of Indiana that required it to charge equal rates for both types of travel within the state's borders, arguing that this was an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce which should be regulated exclusively by federal law under the Commerce Clause. However, the Supreme Court upheld the commission's order, ruling that states do have some authority to regulate aspects of interstate commerce when they also affect intrastate business or public interests within their jurisdiction as long as such regulations don't conflict with federal laws or policies on these matters.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Grand Trunk Western Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana, it was argued that the Supreme Court should not have interfered with state regulations regarding railway rates. The dissenting justices believed that states had a right to regulate commerce within their borders and set reasonable rates for railroads operating in their jurisdiction. They contended that federal courts should only intervene when there is clear evidence of unreasonableness or discrimination against interstate commerce, neither of which were present in this case according to them. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on local businesses and consumers if railroads could freely increase prices without any state oversight or control. In conclusion, they disagreed with the majority's decision as an overreach into matters reserved for individual states under principles of federalism.