The U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Morgan's Louisiana & Texas Railroad & Steamship Company in 1923 revolved around the issue of whether a state could regulate interstate commerce, specifically freight rates on railroads operating within its borders. The Louisiana Public Service Commission had ordered the railroad company to reduce its intrastate freight rates, arguing that they were excessive and discriminatory against local shippers. However, the railroad company contended that such regulation infringed upon federal authority over interstate commerce as established by Congress through the Interstate Commerce Act. In their decision, the Supreme Court sided with Morgan's Railroad Company stating that while states do have some power to regulate businesses within their boundaries for public interest reasons (such as preventing discrimination or ensuring fair pricing), this power is limited when it comes into conflict with federal control over interstate commerce. Therefore, because setting freight rates was part of regulating trade across state lines - an area under Congressional jurisdiction - Louisiana did not have authority to impose rate reductions on an interstate carrier like Morgan’s Railroad.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Morgan's Louisiana & Texas Railroad & Steamship Company argued that the Supreme Court should not have intervened because it was a matter for state courts to decide. The justice believed that there was no violation of federal rights, as claimed by the majority opinion, and therefore, this case did not warrant intervention from the Supreme Court. He also disagreed with how broadly the court interpreted its jurisdiction over interstate commerce matters. In his view, this interpretation undermined states' rights and disrupted their ability to regulate local businesses effectively within their borders.