In the case of Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. Wood et al., Members of the Arkansas Public Service Commission, 1952, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Company (Fry). The company had challenged an order by the Arkansas Public Service Commission that required it to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity before constructing a private railroad siding connecting its plant with a main line track owned by Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (MoPac). The court held that this requirement was unconstitutional as it violated both due process and equal protection clauses under Fourteenth Amendment because there was no reasonable relationship between requiring such certification for private sidings and any legitimate state interest or policy goal related to regulation of railroads or public utilities.

In the dissenting opinion for Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. Wood et al., Justice Robert H. Jackson argued that the majority's decision to strike down Arkansas' regulation of natural gas prices was a misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause and an overreach into state affairs. He contended that while interstate commerce should be regulated by federal law, intrastate transactions should fall under state jurisdiction unless they directly affect other states or foreign nations - which he did not believe was true in this case. Furthermore, he criticized the court for failing to respect principles of federalism and warned against judicial activism, suggesting it could lead to arbitrary decisions based on personal beliefs rather than constitutional interpretation.