In the case of Henry E. Frankenberg Company v. United States (1906), the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a tax imposed on legacies and distributive shares of personal property, under an act passed by Congress in 1898, applied to estates that were being administered but had not been fully distributed at the time when the law came into effect. The court ruled in favor of the United States, stating that such taxes could be levied on these estates as they fell within scope of "any person dying" as stated in section 29 of said Act. This decision upheld previous rulings which established that inheritance taxes are not direct taxes and therefore do not need to be apportioned among states according to population.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Henry E. Frankenberg Company v. United States argued that the majority's interpretation of the law was too broad and could potentially infringe upon individual rights. The dissenters believed that while it is necessary to regulate commerce, this should not extend to controlling personal conduct or private business operations unless they directly affect interstate commerce. They contended that if a company's actions do not have an immediate and direct impact on interstate trade, then those actions should be outside federal jurisdiction. This view emphasizes a more limited role for federal power over commercial activity, advocating for state-level regulation instead when it comes to matters indirectly related to interstate commerce.