The U.S. Supreme Court case Fischer v. St. Louis in 1903 revolved around the issue of taxation and property rights, specifically concerning a tax imposed by the city of St. Louis on stock owned by non-residents but held within the city's limits for business purposes. The plaintiff, Mr. Fischer, was a resident of New York who owned stocks in several corporations based in Missouri and Illinois that were kept at his office in St.Louis for use there as collateral security or sale when advantageous to him. Fischer argued that this tax violated both his constitutional right to equal protection under law (14th Amendment) and interstate commerce clause (Article I). However, the court ruled against him stating that it was not an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce nor did it violate equal protection laws because all individuals with similar circumstances were treated equally under this law regardless of their residence status. In essence, this ruling affirmed states' rights to levy taxes on personal property located within its jurisdiction even if said property is owned by non-residents conducting business from out-of-state locations.

In the dissenting opinion for Fischer v. St. Louis, Justice Harlan argued that the city of St. Louis had no right to seize and destroy property without due process of law or just compensation, even in the name of public health concerns. He contended that while cities have a responsibility to protect public health, this does not give them carte blanche authority to confiscate and destroy private property without proper legal procedures or fair remuneration for the owner's loss. In his view, such actions violated both state laws and constitutional protections against unlawful seizure and destruction of personal property rights under Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.