In Reed v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., the Supreme Court of the United States addressed a dispute over whether an employee's injury was covered under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The plaintiff, Reed, had been injured while working for Pennsylvania Railroad Company and sought compensation under FELA. However, his claim was denied by lower courts on grounds that he did not meet FELA’s requirement of being engaged in interstate commerce at the time of his injury. Upon appeal to the Supreme Court, it ruled in favor of Reed stating that even though he may have been performing intrastate tasks at times during his employment with Pennsylvania Railroad Company; as long as some part of his duties involved work related to interstate commerce - which they did - then he would be considered "employed" in such commerce within meaning of FELA when injured on job regardless if particular task performed at moment was connected with interstate or intrastate activities.

In the dissenting opinion for Reed v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring railroads to provide separate accommodations for black and white passengers violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenters believed that this segregation policy perpetuated racial discrimination, which they saw as inherently unequal treatment under the law. They contended that any form of racial segregation is unconstitutional because it enforces an artificial barrier between citizens based on their race, thereby denying them equal protection under laws. Furthermore, they asserted that such policies not only harm those who are segregated but also undermine social cohesion by fostering prejudice and intolerance among different races in society.