In the case of Hoeper v. Tax Commission of Wisconsin et al., 1931, the U.S Supreme Court examined whether a state tax on income derived from federal government bonds was constitutional. The plaintiff, Mr. Hoeper, argued that his income from these bonds should be exempt from state taxation under the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity - which holds that one level of government cannot tax another. However, the State of Wisconsin contended it had a right to levy such taxes as part of its inherent power to raise revenue for public purposes. The court ruled in favor of Mr. Hoeper and held that states could not impose taxes on incomes derived directly from federal securities or obligations because this would interfere with federal fiscal operations and violate principles established by prior cases like Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co (1895). This decision reinforced limitations on state taxing powers over federally sourced incomes and underscored principles protecting against potential encroachments upon national supremacy in matters relating to finance and monetary policy.

In the dissenting opinion for Hoeper v. Tax Commission of Wisconsin, Justice Stone argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar cases and violated principles of federalism. He contended that it is not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to interfere with a state's taxation system unless there is clear violation or abuse of constitutional rights. In this case, he believed no such violation occurred as Mr. Hoeper had ample opportunity to challenge his tax assessment in state courts before appealing to federal court. Furthermore, Justice Stone expressed concern over potential consequences if states were unable to enforce their own tax laws without fear of interference from federal courts - an outcome he felt would undermine states' sovereignty and fiscal stability.