In the case of Newman et al., Commissioners of the District of Columbia, v. Lynchburg Investment Corporation in 1914, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over property taxes. The Lynchburg Investment Corporation owned land in Washington D.C., but claimed it was exempt from taxation because it was being used by the U.S. government for public purposes (as military housing). However, local tax commissioners disagreed and levied a tax against them. The corporation sued to recover these taxes arguing that they were improperly assessed as their properties were leased to officers and enlisted men at Fort Myer Virginia which is considered federal use thus exempted from taxation under an act passed by Congress in 1870. The Supreme Court sided with the District of Columbia's argument that even though some parts of its property might be used for governmental purposes, other parts weren't - such as when soldiers' families lived there or when portions remained vacant and could have been rented out commercially - so those areas should still be taxable. Therefore, this case established that only those properties exclusively occupied by United States for public uses are exempted from taxation while others can be taxed accordingly.

In the dissenting opinion for Newman et al., Commissioners of the District of Columbia, v. Lynchburg Investment Corporation, it was argued that the Supreme Court should not have jurisdiction over this case as it involves a local matter concerning property rights in Washington D.C. The dissenting justices believed that such matters should be left to local courts and authorities rather than being decided by federal law or national courts. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of certain statutes related to land ownership and taxation in D.C., arguing that these laws were intended to protect property owners from unfair tax assessments rather than allowing government officials to arbitrarily increase taxes based on their own evaluations. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuses of power if government officials are given too much discretion in determining property values for tax purposes without clear guidelines or checks on their authority.