This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), according to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), the dispute concerns a narrow issue with significant practical importance for the flow of interstate commerce.
During rulemaking the ICC changed its interpretation of the fee cap.
According to Respondents, michigan argues that the ICC’s interpretation is reasonable, that the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision should be reversed, and that the case should be remanded.
Background and question before the Court
According to Justice, did Michigan’s argument rely on a decision that was decided on a different ground below?
According to Justice, is the purpose of the statute merely to preserve State revenues, or does it permit States to substantially increase their revenues?
According to Justice, can a State terminate its reciprocity agreement with Kansas and charge the full $10 fee despite the Federal statute?
What each side argues
Yellow Transportation (Petitioner)
According to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), according to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), the issue in this case is a narrow one, but it has considerable practical importance for the continuing flow of interstate commerce.
Michigan (Respondent)
According to Respondents, the ICC's interpretation of the fee cap is a reasonable implementation of Congress's provision. It is consistent with the language of the statute and its purposes, and the decision of the Michigan Supreme Court should be reversed, and the case should be remanded.
According to State of Michigan, we believe that the Michigan Supreme Court's decision is faithful to the text, results in a consistent and coherent interpretation of the Federal statute, that is consistent with the congressional intent, and we believe it should be affirmed.
What happened at oral argument
According to Justice, in Michigan you — you helpfully began your argument by pointing out that the case had been decided on a different ground below.
According to Justice, i understand that. I'm — I'm not worried about the sky falling, but I'm addressing your argument from the purpose of the statute. And you say the purpose is to preserve State revenues, but you come up with a theory that goes far beyond preserving State revenues. It permits the States to augment their — their revenues considerably.
According to Justice, — is that despite this Federal statute, you can terminate your reciprocity agreement with Kansas and charge the full $10. Right?
What the Court decided
Why it matters
According to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), according to Yellow Transportation, Inc. (Petitioner), the issue has considerable practical importance for the continuing flow of interstate commerce.
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 7d4e60507f59c719a132-r1-b880b2e53d4260cd.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 20, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.