In the case of Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. Mars et al., 1928, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company, reversing a decision by the Oklahoma Supreme Court that had awarded damages to an injured employee under state law. The plaintiff was a switchman who sustained injuries while working for the defendant railroad company and sought compensation under Oklahoma's workers' compensation statute. However, since his employment involved interstate commerce, it fell within federal jurisdiction according to Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA). Therefore, he could not claim benefits under state law as FELA provided exclusive remedy for such cases involving interstate railroads employees’ injury claims. The court held that allowing states to regulate these matters would interfere with uniform national regulation of interstate commerce which is constitutionally vested in Congress.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company v. Mars et al., argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of law and an unwarranted intrusion into state affairs. The dissent contended that it is not within the purview of federal courts to interfere with state laws unless there is a clear violation or conflict with federal legislation, which they believed was not evident in this case. They also expressed concern about potential implications for states' rights and autonomy, arguing that allowing such interference could set a dangerous precedent for future cases. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of negligence on part of the railroad company, asserting instead that any perceived negligence should be determined by local juries familiar with regional conditions rather than by national standards imposed by federal courts.