The U.S. Supreme Court case Oregon - Washington Railroad & Navigation Company v. United States in 1920 revolved around the issue of whether or not the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had jurisdiction over a railroad company's decision to abandon its line of railway, and if so, whether it could order the company to continue operations against its will. The Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company sought to discontinue a portion of their rail service due to financial losses but was ordered by ICC to maintain it for public convenience and necessity. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States, upholding that under the Interstate Commerce Act, ICC did have authority over such matters as they were related directly with interstate commerce regulation. This ruling reinforced federal regulatory power over private businesses when their decisions affected public interest.

In the dissenting opinion for Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company v. United States, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's ruling that upheld an order by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) requiring railroads to provide free transportation to federal employees inspecting and testing scales used in interstate commerce. He argued that this requirement was beyond ICC’s statutory authority as it amounted to a taking of private property without just compensation, violating Fifth Amendment rights. The justice contended that such power could only be granted explicitly by Congress and not inferred from general regulatory powers given to administrative bodies like ICC. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuse of such broad interpretation of regulatory powers which might lead agencies into areas reserved for legislative action.