In the case of Baltzer v. North Carolina, 1895, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state has the right to tax property owned by non-residents at a higher rate than property owned by residents. The plaintiff, Baltzer, was an Illinois resident who owned land in North Carolina and objected to being taxed more heavily for his out-of-state status. He argued this violated both his Fourteenth Amendment rights (equal protection under law) and Article IV Section 2 (privileges and immunities clause). However, the court disagreed with him on both counts. It held that states have broad powers over taxation within their borders as long as they do not interfere with interstate commerce or violate specific constitutional prohibitions - neither of which were applicable here according to them.

In the dissenting opinion for Baltzer v. North Carolina, it was argued that the defendant's constitutional rights were violated due to a lack of proper legal representation during his trial. The justice believed that this violation was sufficient grounds for overturning the conviction and granting a new trial. He emphasized that every citizen has an undeniable right to be represented by counsel in court proceedings, as guaranteed by the Constitution. This fundamental principle is essential in ensuring fair trials and upholding justice within our judicial system. In this case, however, he felt these principles were not upheld because Mr.Baltzer did not have adequate legal representation at his original trial which led to an unfair outcome.