In the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., 1962, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). The dispute arose when several railroads sought to abandon or discontinue passenger services due to financial losses. The ICC approved these requests under certain conditions aimed at minimizing public inconvenience and hardship caused by service discontinuation. However, this decision was challenged by various parties including states and local communities affected by it who argued that ICC did not have authority to impose such conditions on railroad companies seeking abandonment approval. In its ruling, the Supreme Court upheld ICC's power to set terms for service abandonment based on public interest considerations as per their statutory mandate under federal law governing interstate commerce regulation.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Justice Harlan argued that the court majority had overstepped its bounds in interpreting and applying federal law to a state matter. He contended that it was not within their jurisdiction to decide whether or not a railroad company could abandon unprofitable passenger services without first obtaining permission from state authorities. Furthermore, he believed this decision undermined states' rights by allowing federal agencies like the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to supersede local regulations and decisions made by state public utility commissions. In his view, such an interpretation of federal law threatened to disrupt the balance between national and local authority established under American Federalism.