In the case of United States and Interstate Commerce Commission v. American Railway Express Company et al., 1923, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving railway express companies and their rates for transporting newspapers. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had ordered reduced rates, which were challenged by the railway companies as being too low to cover costs and allow for reasonable profit. The District Court sided with the railways, but upon appeal by ICC and U.S Government, this decision was reversed by Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that courts should not interfere with administrative decisions unless there is clear error or violation of law or constitutional rights. It emphasized that rate-setting involves judgment about complex economic factors best left to expert bodies like ICC rather than courts. This ruling established an important precedent in favor of judicial deference to administrative agencies' expertise in regulatory matters.

In the dissenting opinion for UNITED STATES AND INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. AMERICAN RAILWAY EXPRESS COMPANY et al., 1923, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have authority to regulate intrastate commerce rates of express companies operating under a national agreement. The dissenting justices believed that this power belonged exclusively to individual states and should be protected from federal interference unless there is clear evidence of harm or burden on interstate commerce. They contended that in this case, no such harm had been demonstrated by the ICC or any other party involved in the lawsuit. Therefore, they disagreed with majority's decision which upheld ICC's order requiring American Railway Express Company and others to adjust their intrastate rates as per its directive.