The U.S. Supreme Court case Highland Farms Dairy, Inc., et al. v. Agnew et al., 1936 revolved around the issue of milk regulation and distribution in Washington D.C.. The appellants, Highland Farms Dairy and others, challenged a law that allowed the Milk Director to fix minimum prices for milk sold within the District of Columbia (D.C.). They argued that this was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power as it violated their due process rights under the Fifth Amendment by allowing price fixing without providing standards or policies to guide such decisions. However, the Supreme Court upheld this regulatory scheme as constitutional on grounds that public interest justified such regulations given health concerns related to dairy products and economic stability for farmers supplying them were at stake. The court found no violation of due process rights because there were sufficient guidelines provided by Congress regarding how these powers should be exercised.

In the dissenting opinion for Highland Farms Dairy, Inc. v. Agnew et al., Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's interpretation of commerce and its application to this case. He argued that milk production is a local activity and should not be subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. According to him, if all activities affecting interstate commerce were regulated by Congress, it would lead to an overreach of federal power into areas traditionally controlled by states such as agriculture or manufacturing within state borders. He also warned against potential consequences where every aspect of life could become subject to national control simply because they indirectly affect interstate commerce in some way.