In Abner L. Duncan's Heirs and Representatives v. The United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a federal statute of limitations applied to bar an action brought by the heirs of Abner L. Duncan against the United States for damages caused by a breach of contract between their ancestor and the government in 1805. The plaintiffs argued that since they were not parties to this original agreement, they should be allowed to bring suit despite any applicable statutes of limitation because it would otherwise be unjustly denied them relief from injury done them without fault on their part. However, after considering both sides' arguments, the court held that although there may have been some injustice suffered due to application of a statute of limitations in this case, it was within Congress’s power under Article I Section 8 Clause 1 (the Necessary and Proper Clause) “to prescribe regulations concerning causes arising out-of-state or foreign countries” which included enacting statutes limiting actions such as those brought forth here; thus affirming dismissal with prejudice below for failure to comply with said statutory time limits set forth by Congress at issue here today.

In Abner L. Duncan's Heirs and Representatives v. The United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a tax imposed by Congress on certain kinds of property was constitutional or not. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Story argued that the tax in question violated both the letter and spirit of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which grants Congress only limited powers over taxation matters. According to Justice Story, this particular tax exceeded those limits because it taxed an individual’s personal estate without any regard for its value or worth; thus making it an unconstitutional direct tax upon individuals rather than one based on their ability to pay as required by law. Furthermore, he argued that such taxes could be used as instruments for oppression if left unchecked and should therefore be struck down in order to protect citizens from arbitrary government action.