In the case of In re Keasbey and Mattison Company, 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a federal court could issue an injunction against state officials from enforcing a tax law that had been deemed unconstitutional by a lower federal court. The petitioner, Keasbey and Mattison Company, argued that they were being unfairly taxed under Pennsylvania's Act of June 8th, 1891 which imposed taxes on corporations for state purposes. They claimed this act violated their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment as it did not provide equal protection under the law due to its discriminatory nature in taxation. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Keasbey and Mattison Company stating that while states have broad powers to levy taxes for public purposes within constitutional limits; those powers do not extend so far as to permit legislation which is clearly hostile or oppressive towards certain classes or individuals without providing them with any means of defense or redress in state courts. Therefore, when such laws are enforced through penalties and forfeitures recoverable only by suit before tribunals over which defendants can exercise no control nor have any voice in selecting judges who preside thereat - then indeed does Federal jurisdiction become essential for protection against enforcement.

The dissenting opinion in the case of In re Keasbey and Mattison Company, 1895 was not explicitly recorded. The Supreme Court's decision was unanimous with no noted dissents. Therefore, a summary of a dissenting opinion cannot be provided for this particular case as it does not exist within available records.