In the United States v. Carolene Products Co., 1937, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a federal law that prohibited shipment of "filled milk" (skimmed milk compounded with any fat or oil other than milk fat) across state lines. The court ruled in favor of the government stating that Congress had rational basis for believing that filled milk was injurious to public health and therefore could be banned from interstate commerce. This case is particularly notable because it introduced what has come to be known as the "Carolene Products Footnote Four," which suggested a more rigorous standard of review if legislation appears on its face to violate a specific prohibition of the Constitution, restricts political processes or discriminates against discrete and insular minorities.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Carolene Products Co., Justice Harlan Fiske Stone disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a federal law banning filled milk products. He argued that it was not within Congress' power under the Commerce Clause to regulate such matters, as they were more appropriately left to individual states. Furthermore, he contended that there was no substantial evidence proving that filled milk products were harmful or deceptive in nature and thus did not warrant regulation by Congress. The justice also expressed concern over potential misuse of legislative powers if allowed unchecked discretion in determining what constitutes public interest without requiring factual basis for their decisions.