In the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. Texas et al., 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), overturning a decision by the state of Texas to regulate intrastate bus routes that were also part of interstate routes. The ICC had previously issued an order preempting state regulation on these specific bus lines, arguing that they fell under its jurisdiction as per federal law. However, Texas and other states challenged this order, claiming it was beyond ICC's authority and violated principles of federalism. In a unanimous decision led by Justice Thurgood Marshall, the court held that Congress had clearly intended for such transportation to be regulated at a national level when it passed legislation creating ICC and granting it broad regulatory powers over interstate commerce. Therefore, any attempt by individual states to impose their own regulations on these bus lines would undermine this intent and disrupt uniformity in managing nationwide transportation networks.

In the dissenting opinion for Interstate Commerce Commission v. Texas et al., Justice White disagreed with the majority's interpretation of federal law as preempting state regulation of intrastate railroad rates, arguing that this was not Congress' intent when it passed the Staggers Rail Act. He contended that while Congress intended to deregulate railroads and reduce regulatory barriers, it did not intend to eliminate all state authority over intrastate commerce. The justice argued that states should retain their power to regulate in areas where federal laws do not explicitly preclude them from doing so, especially since they have traditionally held such powers. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential negative impacts on shippers and consumers if states were unable to protect against unreasonable or discriminatory pricing by rail carriers operating within their borders.