In the case of Rochester Telephone Corp. v. United States et al., 1938, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and against Rochester Telephone Corporation. The telephone company had challenged an order by FCC that required it to reduce its rates for interstate and foreign communication services, arguing that this was beyond FCC's jurisdiction as per the Communications Act of 1934. However, the court upheld FCC’s authority to regulate these rates under Section 201(b) of said act which allows them to prescribe "just and reasonable" charges for communications services provided by carriers like Rochester Telephone Corporation. This decision affirmed federal regulatory power over interstate telecommunication service providers.

In the dissenting opinion for Rochester Telephone Corp. v. United States, it was argued that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) did not have jurisdiction over intrastate communication services and therefore could not regulate rates charged by a state-chartered telephone company for such services. The dissenters believed that Congress had intended to limit FCC's authority to interstate communications only, as per the Communications Act of 1934. They pointed out that allowing federal regulation in this area would infrally upon states' rights and potentially lead to conflicts between state and federal authorities. Furthermore, they contended that there were no compelling reasons or evidence presented which justified extending FCC's powers into an area traditionally controlled by individual states.