The U.S. Supreme Court case Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Osborne involved a dispute over taxation of railroad property in the state of Nebraska. The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company argued that the method used by Nebraska to assess and tax its property was discriminatory and violated both due process and equal protection clauses under the Fourteenth Amendment. The company claimed that their properties were assessed at full value while other types of property within the state were generally undervalued for tax purposes, resulting in an unfair burden on them. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that it is not unconstitutional if all kinds of properties are not equally taxed or if intangible assets are exempted from taxation as long as there's no clear discrimination against interstate commerce companies like railroads.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Osborne, it was argued that Nebraska's tax on intangible property held by corporations operating in multiple states violated the Due Process Clause and Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The dissenting justices believed that this taxation unfairly burdened interstate commerce and exceeded Nebraska's jurisdictional authority because it taxed value derived from out-of-state operations. They contended that a state should only have power to tax an entity based on its activities within its borders, not beyond them; otherwise, there would be potential for double taxation by different states which is unjust and burdensome for businesses involved in interstate commerce. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s view about apportionment method used by Nebraska as being fair or reasonable.