In the case of City of Meridian v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Southern Bell, stating that a city ordinance requiring telephone companies to obtain a permit before installing equipment on public property was unconstitutional. The court held that this requirement violated the Commerce Clause by placing an undue burden on interstate commerce. The decision further clarified that while states and municipalities have some authority over local aspects of interstate commerce, they cannot interfere with its fundamental operation or continuity. This ruling reaffirmed federal supremacy in regulating interstate commerce and limited state interference in such matters.

In the dissenting opinion for City of Meridian v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's decision that a city ordinance requiring telephone companies to obtain consent before installing equipment on public property was not preempted by federal law. He argued that this ruling undermined the Federal Communications Act, which aimed to create a uniform national policy for telecommunications services. According to him, allowing local authorities like cities and towns to impose their own regulations could lead to inconsistent rules across different jurisdictions, potentially disrupting interstate communication services. Furthermore, he contended that Congress intended for such matters related directly or indirectly affecting interstate commerce should be handled at the federal level rather than being left up to individual municipalities' discretion.