The Assigned Car Cases, United States et al. v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co. et al., 1926, revolved around the Interstate Commerce Commission's (ICC) order requiring railroads to assign coal cars in times of shortage based on historical shipping patterns rather than favoring their own mining operations or those with whom they had special agreements. The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether the ICC had overstepped its authority by issuing such an order and if it violated due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. In a unanimous decision, Justice Harlan Fiske Stone wrote that while Congress did grant broad powers to regulate interstate commerce through agencies like the ICC, these powers were not unlimited and must respect constitutional protections for property rights including due process guarantees under the Fifth Amendment. The court ruled that because there was no fair hearing before issuance of this order and because it arbitrarily interfered with contractual relationships between private parties without sufficient justification or public interest considerations being taken into account, it constituted an unlawful deprivation of property without due process.

In the dissenting opinion for The Assigned Car Cases, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not overstep its authority by ordering railroads to provide specific coal companies with a certain number of cars. The dissenters believed that this order was within the ICC's power to ensure fair and efficient transportation services. They contended that without such regulation, larger coal companies could monopolize available railroad cars, leaving smaller businesses at a disadvantage. This would undermine competition and potentially disrupt interstate commerce - issues which fall under the purview of federal regulation. Therefore, they disagreed with majority's view that these orders constituted an unjust interference in private business affairs.