The U.S. Supreme Court case Interstate Commerce Commission v. Clyde Steamship Company in 1900 revolved around the regulation of interstate commerce and the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). The ICC had ordered Clyde Steamship Company to cease certain practices that were deemed discriminatory against shippers, which was challenged by the company on grounds that its operations did not fall under ICC's authority as they were maritime activities exempt from such regulations. However, upon reaching Supreme Court, it ruled in favor of ICC stating that while direct control over navigation or shipping does not lie with Congress unless related to revenue collection or international treaties; when these services form a part of broader commercial transactions spanning across states, they do come within regulatory purview under interstate commerce clause. Thus, even though steamships are primarily subject to maritime law, if their operations connect different states through transportation and trade then those aspects can be regulated by federal laws governing interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for Interstate Commerce Commission v. Clyde Steamship Company, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) should have jurisdiction over water carriers engaged in interstate commerce when such operations are a continuation of a rail line and part of a through route. The dissenting justices believed that Congress intended to regulate all forms of transportation involved in interstate trade under the ICC Act, including those by waterways. They contended that excluding water carriers from regulation would create an unfair advantage and disrupt competition among different modes of transportations. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "common carrier," arguing it should include any entity providing transportation services to general public regardless its mode or method.