In the 1947 case Moore et al. v. New York, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute regarding property rights and taxation. The plaintiffs were owners of land in Pennsylvania that was used as a watershed for supplying water to New York City, and they argued that their properties had been unfairly taxed by the state of New York due to an incorrect assessment of their value. They claimed this violated both their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection under law and also constituted unlawful taking without just compensation under Fifth Amendment protections against eminent domain abuses. The court disagreed with these arguments, ruling unanimously against them. It held that there was no violation of either amendment because the tax assessments were not arbitrary or discriminatory but based on legitimate considerations related to public use requirements for maintaining adequate water supplies in NYC; therefore it did not constitute an unconstitutional taking without just compensation nor violate equal protection principles since all similarly situated properties within same taxing jurisdiction were treated equally.

In the dissenting opinion for Moore et al. v. New York, Justice Frankfurter argued that the majority's decision to strike down a New York law requiring loyalty oaths from teachers was an overreach of judicial power and a violation of states' rights. He contended that it is not within the purview of federal courts to dictate how states should manage their education systems or determine what qualifications they can require from their educators. Furthermore, he suggested that such decisions should be left up to state legislatures and local school boards who are more familiar with community needs and values than federal judges. He also expressed concern about setting a precedent where any controversial law could potentially be struck down by unelected judges rather than through democratic processes at the state level.