In the case of Bonwit Teller & Company v. United States in 1930, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving customs duties. The luxury department store Bonwit Teller had imported several items from abroad and was subsequently charged with import duties by U.S Customs. However, Bonwit Teller argued that they were overcharged for these goods under the Fordney-McCumber Tariff Act of 1922 which imposed high tariffs on many imports to protect domestic industries after World War I. They claimed that their merchandise should have been classified differently resulting in lower duty charges. The court held that it is not within its jurisdiction to reclassify imported merchandise for customs purposes or determine whether an importer has been overcharged by U.S Customs based on such classifications; this responsibility lies solely with the executive branch of government (specifically, Secretary of Treasury). Therefore, any disputes regarding classification and corresponding tariff rates must be resolved administratively before being brought to court. This decision reinforced separation-of-powers principles between branches of government while also clarifying judicial limitations concerning administrative matters related to trade regulation.

In the dissenting opinion for Bonwit Teller & Company v. United States, Justice Stone argued that the majority's interpretation of Section 402(a) of the Revenue Act was incorrect. He believed that this section should not be read as imposing a tax on gifts made by a decedent within two years prior to death, but rather only on transfers intended to take effect upon or after death. The language used in Section 402(a), according to Justice Stone, did not suggest an intention by Congress to impose such a tax and there were no clear indications elsewhere in the Act suggesting otherwise. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's decision upholding such taxation.