In the case of West Ohio Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, 1934, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state regulatory agency (Public Utilities Commission). The court held that a natural gas company operating under a municipal franchise agreement was subject to regulation by the state's public utilities commission despite its claim to be exempt from such oversight due to its contractual relationship with municipalities. The company had argued that it should not be subjected to rate regulations imposed by both local and state authorities as this would constitute double jeopardy. However, Justice Benjamin Cardozo stated for a unanimous court that there is no constitutional right against dual regulation or control so long as each authority stays within its own jurisdictional sphere without overstepping boundaries set out in law.

The dissenting opinion in the case of West Ohio Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio argued that the majority's decision was an overreach and a violation of state sovereignty. The dissenters believed that it was not within the jurisdiction of federal courts to interfere with decisions made by state utility commissions, as these are matters reserved for states under their police powers. They contended that there should be respect for local authorities' ability to regulate public utilities, which they see as essential services affecting health, safety and welfare of citizens at a local level. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative consequences on future regulatory efforts if federal courts could easily overturn such decisions without due deference to state authority or expertise in managing its own affairs.