In the 1917 case of Manufacturers Railway Company and St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. United States and Interstate Commerce Commission, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over railway rates. The two railway companies had been ordered by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to increase their rates for transporting freight between certain points in Missouri, Illinois, and Arkansas due to complaints from competitors that they were unfairly low. The railways argued this order was an unconstitutional interference with their property rights under the Fifth Amendment as it would cause them financial loss without just compensation. The Supreme Court upheld ICC's decision stating that while railroads are private businesses, they also serve public interest; hence subject to regulation by government agencies like ICC in setting reasonable rates ensuring fair competition among carriers without causing undue harm or advantage to any party involved including shippers or consumers. It further clarified that such regulatory actions do not constitute 'taking' of property requiring compensation under Fifth Amendment unless it is so unjust as to be confiscatory.

In the dissenting opinion for Manufacturers Railway Company and St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. United States and Interstate Commerce Commission, it was argued that the court majority had overstepped its authority by substituting their judgment for that of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). The dissenting justices believed that as long as there is evidence to support ICC's decision, courts should not interfere with it even if they might have reached a different conclusion independently. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how previous cases were handled compared to this one, arguing against what they saw as arbitrary judicial intervention into administrative decisions. Furthermore, they expressed concerns about potential negative impacts on commerce due to uncertainty caused by such interventions.