In the case of Iowa Central Railway Company v. Iowa, 1895, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required railway companies to maintain fences along their tracks violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The court held that it did not violate due process rights as long as it was reasonable and served public safety interests. The State of Iowa had enacted this legislation in response to numerous accidents involving livestock straying onto train tracks, which resulted in damage and loss for farmers and potential danger for passengers on trains. The railway company argued that such laws were an undue burden on interstate commerce but failed to convince the court because they could not prove any significant impact on their operations or profits from complying with these regulations.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Iowa Central Railway Company v. Iowa argued that the state's regulation of railway rates was unconstitutional as it violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees due process and equal protection under law. The justice contended that setting maximum rates for railroads could potentially result in confiscation of property without just compensation if those rates were too low to allow a reasonable return on investment. He also expressed concern about potential discrimination against interstate commerce, arguing that states should not have power to regulate industries with significant national implications such as railways. Furthermore, he believed this decision would open up a floodgate for other states to impose similar regulations on businesses within their jurisdiction, thereby undermining federal authority over interstate commerce.