The Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company v. United States, Interstate Commerce Commission, and Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad Company case in 1923 revolved around the issue of whether or not the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had overstepped its authority by ordering a railway company to provide switching services for another railroad at reasonable rates without discrimination. The Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company argued that this order was beyond the ICC's power as it infringed on their right to manage their own business operations. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that such an order fell within ICC's jurisdiction under federal law which aimed at preventing monopolistic practices in rail transportation and ensuring fair competition among different carriers. Therefore, any refusal by one carrier to switch traffic for another could be seen as discriminatory practice violating these laws.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company v. United States, Interstate Commerce Commission, and Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad Company argued that the majority's decision to uphold the ICC's order was incorrect because it violated principles of due process. The dissenters believed that a fair hearing had not been provided by the ICC before issuing its order for rate adjustments between railroads, which they saw as an arbitrary exercise of power without sufficient evidence or investigation into whether such changes were necessary or justifiable. They also contended that this ruling set a dangerous precedent by allowing regulatory agencies to make decisions affecting private businesses without proper checks and balances in place to protect their rights under law.