The U.S. Supreme Court case Public Utilities Commission of California et al. v. United Air Lines, Inc., et al., in 1953 revolved around the question of whether a state could regulate airfares for intrastate flights that were part of an interstate journey under the Federal Aviation Act (FAA). The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) of California had ordered United Airlines to reduce its fares on certain intrastate routes, which was challenged by United Airlines as it believed this fell within federal jurisdiction and not state authority due to the FAA's provisions. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of United Airlines, holding that states cannot regulate rates for segments of through flights crossing their borders even if they are wholly within one state because such regulation would interfere with comprehensive federal control over interstate commerce provided by Congress via FAA.

In the dissenting opinion for Public Utilities Commission of California et al. v. United Air Lines, Inc. et al., Justice Jackson argued that the majority's decision to allow federal courts to review state regulatory decisions was a dangerous overreach of federal power and an intrusion on states' rights. He contended that this ruling would undermine the authority and independence of state regulatory bodies by subjecting their decisions to second-guessing by federal judges who may not have expertise in complex matters like utility regulation. Furthermore, he warned that such judicial interference could lead to inconsistent rulings and legal uncertainty as different courts might interpret regulations differently or apply different standards of review. Ultimately, Justice Jackson believed that it should be up to Congress, not the judiciary, to decide whether there needs to be more oversight over state public utilities commissions.