The case of Morland et al. v. Sprecher, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, et al., 1978 involved a dispute over whether or not federal courts had jurisdiction to hear cases involving state tax laws before they were enforced by the state itself. The plaintiffs in this case sought an injunction against enforcement of Wisconsin's inheritance and estate taxes on constitutional grounds but were denied relief by lower courts due to lack of jurisdiction under the Tax Injunction Act (TIA). Upon reaching the Supreme Court, it was held that TIA did not bar federal court intervention in such matters as long as there was no "plain, speedy and efficient remedy" available at the state level. This decision effectively allowed taxpayers to challenge potentially unconstitutional state tax laws in federal court prior to their enforcement.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Morland et al. v. Sprecher, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, et al., argued that the majority's decision to dismiss the appeal was incorrect and premature. The dissenters believed that there were significant constitutional issues at stake regarding due process rights and equal protection under law which had not been adequately addressed by lower courts or by the majority opinion. They contended that dismissing an appeal on procedural grounds without fully considering these substantive legal questions undermined fundamental principles of justice and fairness. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential implications for future cases involving similar circumstances if such important constitutional matters remained unresolved.