The U.S. Supreme Court case News Syndicate Company v. New York Central Railroad Company et al., 1927, revolved around a dispute over the interpretation of an agreement between the parties regarding transportation rates for newspapers and magazines. The News Syndicate Company argued that they were entitled to a lower rate under their contract with the railroad company, while the latter disagreed and charged them at higher rates. The Interstate Commerce Commission sided with the railroad company, interpreting that there was no specific provision in their agreement entitling News Syndicate to special or reduced rates for newspaper transportations. The case reached the Supreme Court which upheld this decision by affirming that contracts should be interpreted as they are written unless there is ambiguity or evidence of contrary intent from both parties when entering into it. In this instance, since no such ambiguities existed nor any proof showing mutual intention for preferential treatment on freight charges could be found in their contract; henceforth, New York Central Railroad's action charging regular tariffs was deemed lawful.

The dissenting opinion in the case of News Syndicate Company v. New York Central Railroad Company argued that the majority's decision was an overreach and misinterpretation of the Interstate Commerce Act. The dissenters believed that while it is within Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, this does not extend to dictating specific business practices or operations unless they directly affect such commerce. They contended that there was no evidence presented showing how providing free transportation for newspaper reporters would negatively impact interstate trade or competition among newspapers. Therefore, according to them, prohibiting railroads from offering free passes to journalists exceeded Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause and infringed upon states' rights and private businesses' freedom of contract.