In the case of Northern Pacific Railway Company v. State of North Dakota ex rel. McCue, Attorney General in 1909, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between a state and a railway company over freight rates. The State of North Dakota had passed laws regulating maximum charges for intrastate transportation services provided by railroads operating within its borders. The Northern Pacific Railway Company challenged these laws as unconstitutional under both the Due Process Clause and Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution, arguing that they interfered with interstate commerce and deprived them their property without due process of law. The Supreme Court upheld North Dakota's regulations, ruling that states have authority to regulate railroad rates for intrastate transport so long as those regulations do not interfere with interstate commerce or violate any other constitutional provisions. This decision affirmed states' rights to regulate businesses within their boundaries while also maintaining federal control over interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for Northern Pacific Railway Company v. State of North Dakota, it was argued that the majority's decision to strike down a state law regulating railroad freight rates interfered with states' rights and ignored precedent. The dissenters believed that the court had overstepped its boundaries by invalidating a law passed by a sovereign state, arguing that this action violated principles of federalism. They also pointed out previous cases where similar laws were upheld as constitutional, suggesting inconsistency in the court's rulings. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constituted reasonable rates and how these should be determined. In their view, determining reasonableness was within the purview of legislative bodies rather than courts.