In the case of Armour & Company v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 1917, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Virginia. The dispute arose when Armour & Company, a Chicago-based meatpacking firm, was charged with violating a state law that prohibited foreign corporations from doing business within its borders without first obtaining a license. The company argued that this law violated both the Due Process Clause and Commerce Clause of the Constitution by unfairly discriminating against out-of-state businesses. However, the court disagreed and upheld Virginia's right to regulate commerce within its boundaries as long as it did not interfere with interstate trade or violate federal laws. It found no evidence that requiring foreign corporations to obtain licenses before operating in-state constituted an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce or infringed upon their constitutional rights. The ruling affirmed states' authority to control their own economic affairs while also acknowledging limitations imposed by federal law and constitutionally protected freedoms for businesses operating across state lines.

In the dissenting opinion for Armour & Company v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. argued that the state's tax on foreign corporations was not discriminatory and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He reasoned that there were significant differences between domestic and foreign corporations which justified different treatment under law, including differing obligations to shareholders and varying degrees of control over corporate affairs by local authorities. Furthermore, he contended that it was within a state's rights to impose taxes as they saw fit in order to protect their economic interests against potential exploitation by out-of-state entities. Therefore, he disagreed with majority’s decision deeming this taxation unconstitutional.