The Los Angeles Switching Case of 1913 was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court that significantly impacted railroad companies and their operations. The case revolved around the issue of whether or not railroads could charge for switching cars between different lines within terminal areas, which are typically congested spaces where multiple railway lines converge. The court ruled in favor of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), stating that it had jurisdiction over intrastate commerce when it affected interstate commerce. This meant that railroads were required to provide free interchange service within terminal areas, as charging fees would interfere with interstate trade by creating an unfair advantage for certain businesses over others. This ruling set a precedent for future cases involving transportation regulation and helped establish the ICC's authority to regulate all aspects of railroad operation affecting interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for The Los Angeles Switching Case, 1913, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have jurisdiction over intrastate commerce. This view held that while Congress had power to regulate interstate commerce, it could not interfere with trade within a state's borders unless such trade directly affected interstate commerce. The dissenters believed that in this case, there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove that intrastate rates were adversely affecting or discriminating against interstate traffic. They maintained that any regulation of purely local affairs should be left to individual states and their regulatory bodies rather than being controlled by federal agencies like ICC. Furthermore, they emphasized on maintaining a clear distinction between what is national and what is local in order to preserve the balance of powers as intended by the framers of Constitution.