Hitchcock v. Galveston was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could tax a federal government-owned property. The case arose when the City of Galveston, Texas, attempted to impose a tax on a lighthouse owned by the United States government. The United States government argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court agreed with the United States government and held that the tax was unconstitutional. The Court reasoned that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution prohibited states from taxing federal property. The Court also held that the tax was an unconstitutional burden on the federal government's ability to exercise its powers. The Court's decision in this case established the principle that states cannot tax federal property.

In Hitchcock v. Galveston, the United States Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state-created corporation had the power to issue bonds without approval from Congress. The majority opinion held that such authority did not exist and that any attempt by a state-created corporation to do so would be unconstitutional. Justice Field dissented, arguing that states have broad powers under the Constitution and should be allowed to exercise them as they see fit in order for their citizens' interests to be served. He argued further that Congress has no right or authority over matters of purely local concern and thus could not interfere with decisions made by states regarding their own internal affairs. Furthermore, he noted that if Congress were given control over all aspects of corporate activity within each state it would lead to an undue concentration of power in Washington D C which is contrary both to our federal system of government and its underlying principles of liberty and self-governance