The U.S. Supreme Court case Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1915 revolved around the issue of taxation on foreign corporations by states. The Fidelity and Deposit Company, a corporation based in Maryland but doing business across several states including Pennsylvania, was taxed by the latter state for premiums collected from policies issued to cover risks within its jurisdiction. The company contested this tax, arguing that it violated the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause under Fourteenth Amendment as well as impeded interstate commerce. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that there was no violation since insurance companies are not engaged in interstate commerce per se because their contracts are local transactions; thus they can be regulated or taxed by individual states where they operate without infringing upon federal authority over interstate commerce. Furthermore, it held that taxing out-of-state corporations did not violate equal protection rights because these entities receive benefits from operating within those jurisdictions such as legal protections and access to courts.

In the dissenting opinion for Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision that a state could tax an out-of-state corporation on premiums collected by its agents within the state. He argued that such taxation was unconstitutional because it interfered with interstate commerce and violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. According to Holmes, a company should not be taxed in a jurisdiction where it does not have physical presence or substantial nexus. The mere fact that an insurance company sends policies into another state through mail or employs local solicitors there doesn't make it liable to pay taxes in that state as per his understanding of constitutional law principles at play here.