The U.S. Supreme Court case Great Northern Railway Company v. State of Minnesota in 1909 revolved around the issue of whether a state could regulate railroad rates for interstate commerce, or if this was solely within federal jurisdiction. The Great Northern Railway Company challenged the constitutionality of a Minnesota law that set maximum freight and passenger rates for railroads operating within the state, arguing it interfered with interstate commerce regulation which is under federal control according to the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The court ruled in favor of Minnesota, stating that while Congress has exclusive authority over interstate commerce, states can still exercise their police powers to protect public health and safety unless they directly conflict with federal laws or regulations. Therefore, until Congress enacted legislation specifically regulating railway rates (which it had not done at that time), states were free to do so.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Great Northern Railway Company v. State of Minnesota, it was argued that the state had a right to regulate railroad rates within its borders and that this did not infringe upon interstate commerce regulations. The dissenting justices believed that railroads were public utilities subject to government control and regulation in order to protect consumers from unfair pricing practices. They disagreed with the majority's interpretation of federal law as preemptive over state laws regarding intrastate commerce, arguing instead for a more balanced approach where both levels of government could exercise their respective powers without encroaching on each other's jurisdiction. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on states' rights and local autonomy if federal authority was allowed unchecked dominance over all aspects of railway operations across different states.