The U.S. Supreme Court case Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company in 1909 revolved around the issue of whether or not the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had the authority to mandate specific bookkeeping practices on railroad companies. The ICC argued that it was within their power under federal law to require uniform accounting systems for all railroads involved in interstate commerce, which would allow them to better regulate rates and prevent discriminatory pricing practices. However, the Chicago & Alton Railroad Company contended that this overstepped governmental boundaries into private business operations. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court sided with the ICC, affirming its right to enforce standardized accounting procedures among railroads engaged in interstate trade as part of its regulatory function under Congress's constitutional power over interstate commerce. This ruling reinforced federal oversight capabilities regarding large corporations during an era when such entities were rapidly growing and becoming more influential.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company, it was argued that the Supreme Court should not have jurisdiction over this matter as it is a dispute between two private entities and does not involve any public interest or federal law. The dissenting justices believed that Congress did not intend to give such broad powers to the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) when they created it, especially in matters involving purely private contracts. They also raised concerns about due process rights being violated if ICC could arbitrarily set rates without court review or intervention. Furthermore, they contended that allowing ICC to regulate these types of agreements would lead to an undue burden on interstate commerce and potentially harm economic growth and development.