This Supreme Court case involved the Bank of the United States, which was suing the United States. The bank argued that it had a right to compensation for property taken by Congress in 1811 when they passed an act revoking its charter and dissolving it. The court ultimately ruled against the bank, finding that Congress had acted within their constitutional authority in passing this act and thus did not owe any compensation to the bank. This ruling established precedent regarding congressional power over corporations chartered by them as well as set limits on what kind of claims could be brought against government entities such as states or federal governments.

In this case, the Bank of the United States argued that it was exempt from paying taxes on certain bonds issued by the state of Maryland. The Supreme Court disagreed and held that Congress did not have authority to grant such an exemption. Justice McLean dissented, arguing that while Congress may not be able to pass a law granting such an exemption, they could do so through treaty-making power granted in Article II of the Constitution. He further argued that since treaties are supreme over all other laws, any tax exemptions granted by treaty would supersede any conflicting state or federal laws. Furthermore, he noted that if there were no legal basis for granting such an exemption then it should still stand as a matter of equity and fairness given how long these exemptions had been in place prior to this dispute arising between parties involved.