In the case of Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. United States in 1959, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between several railroad companies and the federal government regarding freight rates for shipping military equipment during World War II. The railroads argued that they were entitled to additional compensation because they had been required by law to give preferential treatment to these shipments, which disrupted their normal operations and caused financial loss. However, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) denied their claims based on an interpretation of relevant statutes and wartime regulations. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, ruling that while railroads could claim extra compensation if forced by government order to prioritize certain shipments at below-market rates, this did not apply when such orders simply reflected existing legal obligations or general wartime conditions rather than specific governmental directives causing undue hardship or loss beyond what would normally be expected under those conditions. Therefore, since there was no evidence of any extraordinary circumstances justifying additional payment beyond standard freight charges in this case according to established laws and regulations governing railway transportation services during war times as interpreted by ICC - whose decisions are given considerable deference due its expertise in regulating interstate commerce - it concluded that railroads' claims must be rejected.

In the dissenting opinion for Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. United States, the justice argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had overstepped its bounds by ordering a reduction in joint rates without first determining whether individual railroads were earning a fair return on their investment. The justice believed this was contrary to previous court decisions which held that before reducing rates, it must be established that they are yielding more than a reasonable return. He further contended that there was no evidence presented indicating these railroads were making excessive profits from these joint rates and thus, he saw no justification for ICC's order to reduce them. Additionally, he expressed concern about potential negative impacts of such rate reductions on railroad companies' ability to attract necessary capital for improvements and expansions.