In the case of Hardin, Mayor of Tazewell, et al. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 1967, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kentucky Utilities Co., affirming its right to operate a power plant without interference from local government regulations that conflicted with state laws. The dispute began when the town of Tazewell attempted to enforce an ordinance requiring utilities to obtain a franchise before operating within city limits. However, Kentucky Utilities had already been granted permission by the state's Public Service Commission (PSC) to construct and operate their facility in question which was located outside but near Tazewell’s boundaries and served customers both inside and outside those boundaries. The court held that under Kentucky law, once a utility company has obtained approval from PSC for construction or operation it is not required also to comply with municipal franchising requirements unless specifically ordered by PSC itself; thus preempting conflicting local ordinances like Tazewell’s one at issue here. This decision underscored principles related to preemption - where federal or state laws take precedence over lower-level legislation - as well as highlighting issues around regulatory jurisdiction between different levels of government.

In the dissenting opinion for Hardin, Mayor of Tazewell, et al. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law allowing municipalities to annex territory from utility companies without compensation was unconstitutional. He contended that this amounted to an unlawful taking of private property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's assertion that such laws were necessary for urban growth and development, arguing instead they could lead to abuse by enabling cities to seize valuable assets from utilities under the guise of expansion. Ultimately, he believed this ruling set a dangerous precedent which undermined fundamental property rights protected by the Constitution.