In Ziffrin, Incorporated v. United States et al., the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) that restricted Ziffrin Inc.'s interstate motor carrier operations to those it had performed under its original permit issued in 1936. The ICC's order was based on their finding that Ziffrin had expanded its operations beyond what was authorized in its initial permit without obtaining necessary approval from the commission. This expansion included transporting liquor into dry states where such transportation was illegal and thus not part of regular route service as required by law for common carriers like Ziffrin Inc.. The court ruled that since these unauthorized activities were substantial, continuous and conducted over a long period of time, they constituted an abuse of authority granted under the original permit which justified restrictions imposed by ICC.

In the dissenting opinion for Ziffrin, Incorporated v. United States et al., Justice Frank Murphy argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) overstepped its authority by regulating intrastate trucking operations of an interstate carrier. He contended that such regulation was a matter for state authorities and not within ICC's jurisdiction under federal law. The majority decision upheld ICC's power to regulate these activities based on their impact on interstate commerce, but Murphy disagreed with this interpretation of the law. He believed it could lead to excessive federal control over local matters and undermine states' rights in areas traditionally reserved for them under U.S Constitution’s principles of federalism.