The U.S. Supreme Court case Omaha Electric Light and Power Co. v. City of Omaha in 1912 revolved around the issue of whether a city could revoke a franchise granted to an electric company before its expiration date without violating the Contract Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits states from passing laws that impair contractual obligations. The City of Omaha had granted a fifty-year franchise to the power company but later passed an ordinance attempting to terminate it early due to alleged non-compliance with certain conditions by the company. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Omaha Electric Light and Power Co., stating that while cities have broad powers over their streets, they cannot unilaterally alter or abrogate contracts made under lawful authority unless such power is expressly reserved at time contract was entered into or there has been some form of forfeiture through noncompliance with terms on part of grantee.

In the dissenting opinion for Omaha Electric Light and Power Co. v. City of Omaha, it was argued that the city's actions were not a violation of due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment as claimed by the power company. The justice believed that there was no constitutional issue involved in this case because it pertained to local matters within state jurisdiction rather than federal law or constitutionality issues. He maintained that states have inherent authority over their municipalities and can regulate them accordingly, including granting or revoking franchises like those held by utility companies such as Omaha Electric Light and Power Co., without interference from federal courts unless there is clear evidence of abuse or discrimination against interstate commerce which wasn't present in this case.