In the case of Hunt, Executor of Weighel v. United States in 1921, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning federal estate tax law. The dispute arose after George Weighel passed away and left his entire estate to his wife without any provision for payment of federal taxes due upon his death. When Mrs. Weighel also died shortly thereafter, her executor (Hunt) argued that he should not be held responsible for paying Mr. Weighel's unpaid taxes from Mrs. Weighe's remaining assets as it was not explicitly stated in Mr.Weigel’s will that she must pay these debts from her inheritance. The court disagreed with this argument and upheld the lower court's decision which found Hunt liable for those taxes under Section 202(b) of Revenue Act 1918 stating that property transferred by a decedent at death is subject to taxation regardless if there are provisions made or not within their wills regarding such matters. This ruling clarified an important aspect of federal tax law: even when no explicit provision is made in a deceased person’s will about settling outstanding tax liabilities, inheritors can still be held responsible for them.

In the dissenting opinion for Hunt v. United States, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the law regarding tax exemptions on legacies or distributive shares given for religious purposes. He argued that under Section 214(a)(10) of Revenue Act 1918, such bequests should not be taxed if they are used exclusively for religious purposes and do not benefit any individual. In this case, he believed that Weighel’s will clearly indicated his intent to use his estate solely for religious uses by directing it towards a church building fund and other similar causes. Therefore, according to Justice McReynolds' interpretation of the law, these funds should have been exempt from taxation as per Weighel's wishes rather than being subjected to federal estate taxes as decided by the majority ruling.