In the 1906 case of Gatewood v. North Carolina, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on an issue regarding a state's right to tax income from bonds issued by out-of-state municipalities. The plaintiff, Gatewood, was a resident of North Carolina who owned bonds issued by various cities outside of his home state. He argued that under Article IV and the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, he should not be required to pay taxes in North Carolina for income derived from these out-of-state bonds. However, the court disagreed with this argument and upheld North Carolina's right to levy such taxes. It stated that while states cannot interfere with or impede federal operations (such as taxing federal securities), they are free to tax all property within their jurisdiction unless explicitly prohibited by Congress - including income from municipal bonds held by residents but issued elsewhere. The decision affirmed that there is no constitutional principle preventing one state from taxing its residents' incomes derived from any source whatsoever unless expressly forbidden so doing; thus reinforcing states' rights over taxation matters within their borders.

The dissenting opinion in the Gatewood v. North Carolina case argued that the defendant's constitutional rights were violated due to an unfair trial process. The justice believed that Mr. Gatewood was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself against the charges, as he was denied access to counsel during his initial hearing and did not have sufficient time or resources to prepare for his subsequent trial. Additionally, it was noted that there were significant issues with how evidence was collected and presented in this case, which further undermined its fairness and reliability. The justice also expressed concerns about potential bias within the jury selection process, suggesting it may have influenced their decision-making unfairly against Mr. Gatewood.