In the case of Maricopa County et al. v. Valley National Bank of Phoenix, 1942, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving tax law and property rights. The issue at hand was whether or not Arizona's state tax laws could be applied to federal land that had been leased by private entities for commercial purposes. The Valley National Bank of Phoenix held leases on several parcels of federal land in Maricopa County, which they used for agricultural purposes and argued that these lands should be exempt from local taxation due to their status as federal properties. The court disagreed with this argument and upheld Arizona's right to levy taxes on such properties under its general ad valorem taxing scheme despite them being owned by the Federal Government but leased out for private use. It concluded that while states cannot directly tax the Federal Government or its property without consent, they can indirectly do so when those properties are used privately rather than for public functions.

In the dissenting opinion for Maricopa County et al. v. Valley National Bank of Phoenix, Justice Frank Murphy argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of constitutional law and taxation. He contended that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment by allowing Arizona to tax national banks differently than other corporations in violation of federal law prohibiting discriminatory state taxation against national banks. He also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "shares" under Arizona law, arguing that they should be viewed as an interest in corporate property rather than separate entities subject to individual taxation. Furthermore, he believed this ruling could potentially lead to double taxation on shareholders and undermine uniformity in tax laws across states.