The Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission and Young case in 1910 revolved around the issue of whether the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had jurisdiction over a railroad company's rates for intrastate commerce when it affected interstate commerce. The Southern Pacific Terminal Company, a railway corporation operating within Texas, was accused by ICC of giving undue preference to certain shippers through rebates and other discriminatory practices that violated federal law. The Supreme Court held that while generally states have control over their internal commerce, if those actions substantially impact interstate trade or are part of an overall scheme affecting such trade, then they fall under federal regulation as well. Therefore, the court upheld ICC's authority to regulate these activities even though they were technically intrastate operations because they significantly influenced interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission and Young, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to allow a two-year statute of limitations on complaints filed with the ICC was too restrictive. He believed this ruling would prevent many legitimate claims from being heard, as it often takes longer than two years for parties to realize they have been wronged and gather sufficient evidence to file a complaint. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "reparation," arguing that it should include not only compensation for past injuries but also preventative measures against future harm. Lastly, he expressed concern over potential abuse by powerful corporations who could use their influence to delay proceedings until after the limitation period had expired.