In the case of Transit Commission et al. v. United States et al., 1931, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving federal and state jurisdiction over transportation rates in New York City. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had approved an increase in commuter rail fares proposed by several railroad companies operating between New York and neighboring states, but this was challenged by the New York State Transit Commission who argued that they should have authority to regulate these rates as it affected intrastate commerce. However, the Supreme Court sided with ICC ruling that interstate commerce laws took precedence over state regulations when there was a direct conflict between them because of their constitutional basis under Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce. Therefore, even though some aspects of these services were within a single state, since they were part of an overall system crossing multiple states' borders they fell under federal jurisdiction.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Transit Commission et al. v. United States et al., Justice Stone argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have jurisdiction over intrastate railway rates, even if they affected interstate commerce indirectly. He contended that Congress had only given ICC control over direct aspects of interstate commerce and not indirect ones like intrastate rail fares. Furthermore, he believed this power should remain with state authorities unless explicitly transferred to federal agencies by Congress. The majority's decision, in his view, was an unwarranted expansion of federal authority into areas traditionally controlled by states and could lead to a dangerous concentration of power at the national level.