In the case of Limbach, Tax Commissioner of Ohio v. Hooven & Allison Co., 1983, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an Ohio tax law was unconstitutional because it violated the Commerce Clause and Import-Export Clause by discriminating against interstate commerce. The law in question imposed a use tax on imported goods stored within state borders but exempted those manufactured domestically from similar taxation. Hooven & Allison Co., a manufacturer using both domestic and foreign materials for its products, challenged this discriminatory treatment arguing that it interfered with their ability to compete fairly in the market place as they were taxed more heavily than companies only using domestic resources. The court agreed with them stating that such discrimination is not permissible under federal law which seeks to maintain free trade among states and prevent protectionist policies favoring local industries over out-of-state or foreign competitors.

In the dissenting opinion for Limbach, Tax Commissioner of Ohio v. Hooven & Allison Co., Justice White argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and unnecessarily complicated interstate commerce taxation. He contended that the Court had previously held in Japan Line Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles that a state could not tax property based on its location at a specific moment in time if it were part of an ongoing stream of interstate commerce, which contradicted their ruling in this case to allow Ohio to tax goods still considered as being involved in foreign commerce due to their temporary storage within the state before further distribution elsewhere. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's reliance on constitutional language regarding foreign imports rather than focusing on practical considerations about how such taxes impact businesses engaged in international trade.