In the case of Darnell, Executor v. State of Indiana in 1912, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state law that allowed for inheritance tax on property passed from a deceased individual to their surviving spouse violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The appellant argued that this taxation was discriminatory as it did not apply to all classes of people equally - specifically those who were childless and unmarried at death. However, the court ruled against this argument stating that there is no constitutional requirement for taxes to be imposed uniformly upon everyone or every type of property within a state's jurisdiction. It held that states have wide discretion in deciding which subjects should be taxed and how much they should contribute towards public revenue based on their circumstances and ability to pay without violating equal protection rights under the constitution.

In the dissenting opinion for Darnell v. State of Indiana, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on inheritances was flawed because it failed to consider the constitutional implications of such a tax. He contended that an inheritance is not income and therefore should not be subject to taxation under the 16th Amendment, which allows Congress to levy taxes on incomes without apportionment among states or regard for any census or enumeration. Furthermore, he asserted that this interpretation could lead to double taxation since both inherited property and its subsequent income would be taxed separately. This, according to him, contradicts fundamental principles of fairness in taxation as well as infringes upon individual property rights protected by due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment.