In the case of Boston Chamber of Commerce v. City of Boston in 1909, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights and taxation. The Boston Chamber of Commerce owned a building that was partially leased to commercial businesses while part remained for its own use. The city taxed the entire property as if it were all used for profit-making purposes, which led to an appeal by the chamber arguing that portion used for their operations should be exempt from taxes under Massachusetts law because they are a charitable organization. The Supreme Court upheld lower court decisions favoring the city's position, ruling that even though some activities carried out by organizations like chambers of commerce may be considered beneficial or charitable in nature, this does not necessarily make them charities within legal definitions applicable to tax laws. Therefore, such entities can't claim exemption from property taxes based on partial non-profit usage unless explicitly provided by state legislation.

In the dissenting opinion for Boston Chamber of Commerce v. City of Boston, it was argued that the city's ordinance requiring a permit to distribute commercial flyers on public streets did not violate First Amendment rights. The dissent contended that this regulation was within the city's police power and served a legitimate interest in preventing litter and maintaining order. It also emphasized that there were alternative channels available for communication, such as newspapers or billboards, which would not be affected by this restriction. Furthermore, it pointed out that businesses could still distribute their materials without a permit if they did so from private property or through mailings. Therefore, while acknowledging the importance of free speech protections even in commercial contexts, these justices believed that these considerations needed to be balanced against other valid governmental interests and practical concerns.