In the 1926 case of Kelley v. Oregon, the U.S Supreme Court addressed a dispute over inheritance tax law. The plaintiff, Kelley, was an executor of an estate that included stocks in two corporations based outside of Oregon but doing business within the state. Upon death, these stocks were transferred to beneficiaries who resided outside of Oregon as well. The State Tax Commission assessed an inheritance tax on this transfer which Kelley contested arguing it violated both due process and equal protection clauses under Fourteenth Amendment since neither decedent nor beneficiaries were residents in Oregon. The court ruled against Kelley stating that while property may be located elsewhere physically (stocks), its control and beneficial use can still be exercised within a particular jurisdiction (Oregon). Therefore, it is subject to taxation by said jurisdiction without violating constitutional rights. This decision reinforced states' power to levy taxes on intangible properties such as corporate stock when companies conduct significant business operations within their borders even if owners reside elsewhere.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kelley v. Oregon argued that the state law, which required all voters to be able to read and write English, was unconstitutional. The justice believed this requirement violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause as it discriminated against immigrants who were not proficient in English. They contended that literacy tests have historically been used as a tool for voter suppression and discrimination, particularly against racial minorities and immigrants. Furthermore, they asserted that voting is a fundamental right of citizenship and should not be restricted based on language proficiency or educational attainment. This view held that such restrictions undermine democratic principles by excluding certain groups from political participation.