In the case of Montana ex rel. Haire v. Rice, State Treasurer in 1906, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state law that allowed for public funds to be used for sectarian schools violated the Constitution's prohibition on laws "respecting an establishment of religion." The court ruled that it did not violate this clause because it did not establish a church or force anyone to attend one. Instead, it merely provided funding for education and left parents free to choose where their children would go to school. This decision has been cited as precedent in later cases involving similar issues about government aid to religious institutions.

In the dissenting opinion for Montana ex rel. Haire v. Rice, State Treasurer, 1906, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a state law requiring all taxes collected from liquor licenses to be distributed among counties and municipalities violated the U.S Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenting justices believed this law unfairly discriminated against certain taxpayers by forcing them to bear an unequal burden of taxation without receiving any corresponding benefits or services in return. They contended that such discrimination constituted a violation of equal protection under the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of previous court rulings on similar matters and maintained that these precedents did not support such discriminatory tax laws.