In the United States v. Petty Motor Co., 1945, the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving wartime price controls. The Office of Price Administration (OPA) had set maximum prices for new cars during World War II to combat inflation and ensure fair distribution of scarce resources. However, Petty Motor Company sold cars above these fixed prices and was subsequently sued by the U.S government for violating regulations under Emergency Price Control Act of 1942. The main issue in this case was whether or not OPA's regulation could be applied to intrastate transactions that did not directly affect interstate commerce. The court held that Congress has power under Commerce Clause to regulate local incidents which might have an indirect effect on interstate commerce. Petty argued they were only selling locally within Texas state lines but the court rejected this argument stating even though their business was local, it still affected national economy due its connection with nationwide automobile industry which is part of interstate commerce system. Therefore, it upheld OPA’s authority over such transactions ruling in favor of US Government against Petty Motors affirming lower courts' decisions.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Petty Motor Co., Justice Robert H. Jackson disagreed with the majority's decision that a government agency could sue in federal court to recover damages under common law, despite no statutory authority explicitly allowing such action. He argued that this interpretation expanded governmental power beyond its intended limits and blurred the separation of powers by allowing executive agencies to essentially create new legal rights without legislative approval. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses of this newfound power, as it would allow any government agency to bring lawsuits based on their own interpretations of what constitutes public interest or policy objectives rather than relying on clear statutory mandates from Congress.