In the 1921 case of State of Texas v. Interstate Commerce Commission and Railroad Labor Board, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving state versus federal authority over railway labor disputes. The State of Texas had attempted to prevent railroads operating within its borders from complying with wage standards set by the federally established Railroad Labor Board (RLB). The court held that under the Transportation Act of 1920, Congress intended for national uniformity in railroad labor relations and therefore granted power to resolve such disputes to federal agencies like RLB rather than individual states. Thus, it was determined that Texas did not have jurisdiction over this matter as it fell under interstate commerce which is regulated by federal law. This decision reinforced the supremacy clause in matters related to interstate commerce and further defined boundaries between state and federal powers.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of State of Texas v. Interstate Commerce Commission and Railroad Labor Board, it was argued that the Supreme Court should not have jurisdiction over this matter as it concerns a dispute between a state and federal agencies. The dissenting justices believed that Congress did not intend to give courts power to review decisions made by administrative bodies like the Interstate Commerce Commission or Railroad Labor Board unless there is clear evidence of constitutional violations or abuses of discretion. They also contended that these agencies were created with specific expertise in their respective fields, thus they are better equipped than courts to make informed decisions on complex regulatory issues. Furthermore, they expressed concern about judicial interference undermining these agencies' independence and effectiveness in carrying out their mandates. Therefore, according to them, unless there's an explicit statutory provision allowing judicial review or compelling reasons based on constitutional grounds, courts should refrain from intervening in such matters.