In Gray v. Connecticut (1894), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a case involving William H. Gray, who was convicted of murder in the state of Connecticut and sentenced to death by hanging. The primary issue at hand was whether or not the jury selection process had been prejudiced against him because potential jurors were asked about their views on capital punishment during voir dire - a pre-trial examination used to determine if prospective jurors are suitable for service in a particular trial. Gray's defense argued that this line of questioning resulted in an unfair bias towards conviction since those opposed to capital punishment would be excluded from serving on his jury, thus violating his constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment which guarantees equal protection under law. The Supreme Court disagreed with this argument and upheld Gray’s conviction stating that it is within states' rights to exclude individuals from juries based upon their beliefs about capital punishment as long as they can still render an impartial verdict based solely on evidence presented during trial proceedings.

In the dissenting opinion for Gray v. Connecticut, it was argued that the state law in question did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The justice disagreed with the majority's view that a tax on commercial travelers who were non-residents of Connecticut was discriminatory and unconstitutional. Instead, he believed this tax to be a legitimate exercise of state power to regulate commerce within its borders and ensure fair competition among businesses operating in its jurisdiction. He further contended that states have broad discretion in determining their own taxation policies as long as they do not infringe upon federal authority or discriminate against out-of-state citizens without justification. In his view, there was no evidence presented indicating such discrimination or infringement by Connecticut’s law taxing non-resident commercial travelers.