In the case of International Harvester Company of America v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 1913, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a ruling that found International Harvester guilty under an antitrust law in Kentucky. The company was charged with creating a monopoly by acquiring control over several competing firms and thus suppressing competition within the state. The court ruled that such actions were indeed violations against state laws designed to prevent monopolies and maintain fair business practices. This decision reinforced states' rights to regulate businesses operating within their borders for anti-competitive behavior even if they are incorporated elsewhere.

In the dissenting opinion for International Harvester Company of America v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting corporations from owning farmland in Kentucky violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The dissent contended that this law unfairly discriminated against out-of-state corporations by preventing them from conducting business on equal terms with local individuals and businesses who were allowed to own farmland. Furthermore, they believed that such restrictions could potentially harm economic development and competition within the state by limiting opportunities for outside investment. They also expressed concern about potential violations of interstate commerce protections under federal law.