The State of Washington ex rel. Oregon Railroad and Navigation Company v. Fairchild et al., State Railroad Commissioners, 1911 case revolved around the issue of whether a state had the authority to regulate interstate commerce rates for railroads within its borders. The Oregon Railroad and Navigation Company challenged an order by the Washington State Railroad Commission that reduced freight rates on certain commodities transported within Washington state lines. The railroad company argued that this was an interference with interstate commerce, which is under federal jurisdiction according to the Commerce Clause in the U.S Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company, stating that while states have some power over local aspects of interstate commerce, they cannot interfere with rate regulation as it directly affects trade between states - a matter reserved for Congress alone under federal law. Therefore, any attempt by a state to control or influence such matters would be unconstitutional.

The dissenting opinion in the case of State of Washington ex rel. Oregon Railroad and Navigation Company v. Fairchild et al., argued that the Supreme Court should not have jurisdiction over this matter, as it was essentially a dispute between two states - Washington and Oregon - about their respective regulatory powers over interstate commerce. The dissenters believed that such disputes should be resolved by Congress rather than the courts, since they involve questions of policy rather than law. They also pointed out that allowing individual companies to challenge state regulations in federal court could undermine the ability of states to regulate businesses within their borders effectively.