The Detroit International Bridge Co. v. Corporation Tax Appeal Board of Michigan case in 1932 revolved around the taxation of a privately-owned bridge that connected the United States and Canada. The Detroit International Bridge Company, which owned the Ambassador Bridge, argued against paying taxes to Michigan on income derived from tolls collected for crossing the bridge - asserting that such tax violated both federal law and international treaties with Canada. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Michigan's right to levy taxes on this income. The court held that while Congress had authorized construction of bridges over navigable waters forming boundaries between U.S states and neighboring countries, it did not exempt these structures or their operations from state taxation laws unless explicitly stated by legislation.

In the dissenting opinion for Detroit International Bridge Co. v. Corporation Tax Appeal Board of Michigan, Justice Stone argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings regarding interstate commerce and taxation. He contended that a state has the right to tax property within its jurisdiction, even if it is used in interstate commerce, as long as it does not interfere with Congress' power over such commerce or discriminate against it. The bridge company had willingly subjected itself to Michigan's laws when incorporating there and could not claim immunity from those laws because of its involvement in international trade. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view that federal law preempted state taxation due to an act of Congress authorizing construction of bridges across navigable waters; this did not mean they were exempt from all forms of state control or taxation.