In the 1946 case Freeman, Trustee v. Hewit, Director of Gross Income Tax Division, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state cannot tax income derived from interstate commerce activities if it has already been subjected to an apportioned tax by another state. The case involved Indiana's attempt to impose its gross income tax on revenue earned by Freeman (a trustee for Pullman Company) through leasing railway cars used in interstate commerce. The court held that this was unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause as it resulted in multiple taxation of interstate commerce and unduly burdened such activity. This decision reinforced principles established earlier regarding protection against double taxation and affirmed limitations on states' power to regulate or interfere with interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for Freeman v. Hewit, it was argued that Indiana's tax on gross income from interstate commerce did not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The dissenting justices believed that this case should have been decided based on precedent set in previous cases where similar taxes were upheld as constitutional. They pointed out that there is no provision in the Constitution expressly forbidding states from taxing interstate commerce and argued that such a prohibition should not be implied unless it is absolutely necessary to prevent discrimination against or undue burdens on interstate commerce. In their view, Indiana's tax did not discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce because it applied equally to all types of business activities conducted within the state, regardless of whether they involved intrastate or interstate transactions.