In the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. Diffenbaugh in 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning interstate commerce and railroad rates. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had ordered an increase in freight rates for railroads operating between Chicago and Missouri River points, which was challenged by Mr. Diffenbaugh who argued that it would result in unjust discrimination against shippers from his locality to other localities not affected by the order. However, the court held that ICC's decision did not constitute undue or unreasonable preference or advantage within meaning of Interstate Commerce Act as there was no evidence showing any substantial difference affecting competition between different localities due to this rate adjustment.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. Diffenbaugh argued that the Supreme Court should not have jurisdiction over this matter, as it was essentially a dispute between private parties and did not involve any significant questions of constitutional law or federal authority. The dissenters believed that the majority's decision to uphold the ICC's power to regulate grain elevator rates constituted an unwarranted expansion of federal regulatory powers into areas traditionally governed by state law. They also expressed concern about potential negative impacts on small businesses and local economies resulting from increased federal intervention in these matters. Furthermore, they questioned whether such regulation truly served public interest or merely protected certain commercial interests at expense of others.