The U.S. Supreme Court case ONEOK, Inc., v. Learjet, Inc., 2014 revolved around the issue of whether federal or state law should apply in cases related to natural gas pricing disputes. The plaintiffs were a group of retail buyers who accused interstate pipeline companies including ONEOK of manipulating data to increase prices artificially during the Western Energy Crisis between 2000 and 2002. They filed lawsuits under state antitrust laws for overcharges that occurred due to this alleged manipulation. The defendants argued that these claims fell within the domain of federal regulation (the Natural Gas Act) and thus should be preempted by it. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Learjet and other plaintiffs with a majority decision stating that even though pipelines are subject to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission jurisdiction, it does not preclude retail buyers from filing suits under state antitrust laws for practices affecting retail rates - which fall outside FERC's purview as per Natural Gas Act provisions.

In the dissenting opinion for ONEOK, INC., v. LEARJET, INC., Justice Antonin Scalia argued that state-level antitrust claims should be pre-empted by federal law when they are related to wholesale gas rates. He contended that the majority's decision failed to respect Congress' intent in creating a comprehensive and uniform system of federal regulation over natural gas companies and their rates. He further asserted that allowing states to regulate in this area would result in a patchwork of inconsistent regulations which could undermine the effective operation of the national market for natural gas. In his view, any claim relating directly or indirectly to wholesale rates falls within FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction under Natural Gas Act (NGA). Thus he disagreed with majority’s approach on grounds it blurred lines between retail and wholesale markets.