The Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 1943, was a landmark case that established the "Hope Doctrine," which stated that utility rates set by government regulatory agencies must produce enough revenue for the company to cover costs and provide a reasonable return on investment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal Power Commission (FPC), stating it had acted within its authority when setting rates for interstate natural gas companies. The court held that if the total effect of a rate order cannot be said to be unjust and unreasonable, judicial inquiry under the Act is at an end; meaning courts should not interfere with administrative decisions unless they are clearly outside reasonable bounds. This decision affirmed FPC's power over regulating natural gas prices across state lines and emphasized their role in protecting consumers from excessive charges while ensuring fair returns for companies.

In the dissenting opinion for Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co., Justice Robert H. Jackson argued that the majority's decision to uphold a rate reduction imposed by the Federal Power Commission (FPC) on Hope Natural Gas Company was an overreach of federal power and violated constitutional principles of fairness. He contended that while it is within FPC's authority to ensure reasonable rates, they should not be allowed to arbitrarily lower them without proper justification or consideration for the company’s right to a fair return on its investments. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's reliance on "end result" as their standard in evaluating whether FPC’s actions were justifiable, arguing this approach disregards due process rights and undermines judicial review because it focuses solely on outcomes rather than procedures used in reaching those outcomes.