The U.S. Supreme Court case Bianchi et al. v. Morales et al., 1922, revolved around the issue of whether a state could impose an inheritance tax on property located outside its jurisdiction when the decedent was domiciled in that state at their time of death. The plaintiffs were executors of an estate who argued against paying New York's transfer tax on securities physically located in Illinois but owned by a New York resident at his time of death. The court ruled in favor of the defendants (the State), upholding New York’s right to levy such taxes based on domicile rather than physical location, and thereby affirming states' rights to regulate and control taxation within their borders as they see fit under federal law. This decision set precedent for future cases involving interstate taxation disputes.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Bianchi et al. v. Morales et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Louisiana law prohibiting non-English languages from being taught in schools until after eighth grade was an overreach of state power and infringed upon individual liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissent contended that there was no compelling state interest justifying such a restriction on language instruction, particularly given its impact on immigrant communities who wished for their children to maintain fluency in their native tongues alongside English. It also pointed out inconsistencies with other states' policies which allowed foreign language instruction without any apparent detriment to public welfare or national unity. Furthermore, it criticized the majority's reliance on vague notions of "Americanism" as justification for upholding this discriminatory law, arguing instead for respect towards cultural diversity within American society.