In the case of United States et al. v. Maher, Doing Business as Interstate Busse (1938), the Supreme Court dealt with issues related to interstate commerce and tax law. The defendant, Maher, was a bus operator who provided transportation services between two states but did not pay federal taxes on his gross receipts from these operations under the Revenue Act of 1926. He argued that he was exempt because his business activities were confined within one state at any given time and thus did not constitute interstate commerce subject to federal taxation. The government contended that since passengers were transported across state lines, it constituted an act of interstate commerce regardless of whether or not all activity occurred within a single state at any given moment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government stating that even though each individual leg of transport may have been confined within one state's borders, taken as a whole they formed part of continuous journey across multiple states which qualified as interstate commerce under U.S law and hence taxable by Federal Government.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Maher case argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have jurisdiction over intrastate bus operations, even if they were part of a through route with interstate carriers. The dissenters believed that Congress had only given the ICC authority over interstate commerce and thus could not regulate purely intrastate business activities. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "through routes," arguing it was too broad and would allow for excessive federal regulation of local businesses. Furthermore, they contended that allowing such expansive regulatory power could lead to an imbalance between state and federal powers, undermining states' rights to control their own internal affairs.