In the case of Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Humble, 1900, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state law could regulate interstate commerce in relation to railway freight rates. The plaintiff, Humble, had sued the Texas & Pacific Railway Company for overcharging him on freight costs under a Texas statute that regulated such charges. However, this regulation conflicted with federal laws governing interstate commerce and railroad tariffs. The court ruled in favor of the railway company stating that while states have power to control internal commerce within their boundaries; they cannot interfere or impose regulations on matters of national concern like interstate trade which falls under federal jurisdiction as per Commerce Clause of US Constitution. This decision reinforced supremacy clause and established precedence for future cases involving conflicts between state and federal laws related to commercial activities crossing state lines.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Humble argued that the court majority had incorrectly interpreted the law regarding railway companies' liability for damages to goods during transit. The dissent contended that, under common law, a carrier is not liable for losses caused by acts of God or public enemies unless negligence can be proven on their part. In this case, there was no evidence presented to suggest any negligence by the railway company when a flood damaged Humble's cotton shipment. Therefore, according to this view, it was incorrect and unjust to hold Texas & Pacific Railway Company financially responsible for an event beyond its control and without any proof of neglectful conduct on its part.