In the United States v. Erie Railroad Company case of 1910, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S., upholding a lower court's decision that Erie Railroad was liable for damages caused by a fire started by one of its locomotives. The fire had spread to and destroyed federal property - specifically, timber on public lands. The railroad company argued it should not be held responsible as there were no laws or regulations explicitly stating railroads could be held liable for such damage at that time. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with this argument, asserting that liability did not depend on statutory law but rather common law principles which hold individuals (or corporations) accountable for harm caused by their negligence or misconduct.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Erie Railroad Company, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) should not have jurisdiction over intrastate commerce rates when they affect interstate commerce. The dissenting justices believed that this power should remain with individual states and their regulatory bodies. They contended that allowing federal control in such instances would undermine state sovereignty and blur the constitutional distinction between interstate and intrastate commerce. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuse of power by federal agencies like ICC if given too much authority over local matters traditionally governed by state law.