In the case of St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. United States, 1922, the Supreme Court examined whether a railway company could be held liable for damages caused by its negligence under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The plaintiff was an employee who had been injured while working on a bridge construction project due to alleged negligence on part of his employer - St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company. The defendant argued that FELA did not apply because the work being done at the time was not directly related to interstate commerce and thus outside federal jurisdiction. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, stating that even though he wasn't engaged in interstate transportation at that moment, his employment generally involved such activities and therefore fell within scope of FELA's protection against employer negligence causing injury or death during employment connected with interstate commerce. This decision expanded interpretation of "employment" under FELA beyond immediate tasks performed at time of accident to include overall nature and context of one's job.

The dissenting opinion in the case of St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. United States argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have the authority to regulate intrastate rates, even if they affected interstate commerce. The justice believed that this power was reserved for individual states under their police powers and could only be superseded by Congress when it directly conflicted with interstate commerce regulations. They also expressed concern about potential overreach by federal agencies, cautioning against allowing them too much regulatory power without clear congressional authorization. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of previous court decisions on similar issues, arguing instead that those cases supported a more limited role for federal regulation of intrastate commerce.