The Municipal Investors Association v. Birmingham et al., 1941, was a case that revolved around the issue of whether or not a city could be sued without its consent. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City of Birmingham, Alabama, stating that it had immunity from being sued without its permission under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution which provides sovereign immunity to states and their political subdivisions from suits initiated by private parties. This decision upheld an earlier ruling by an Alabama court which dismissed a suit brought against Birmingham by bondholders who alleged that they were owed money for bonds issued on behalf of public works projects in default due to non-payment.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Municipal Investors Association v. Birmingham et al., 1941, argued that the majority's decision to uphold Alabama's statute was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar issues and violated principles of due process. The dissenters believed that the law unfairly discriminated against non-residents by imposing a higher tax rate on them compared to residents for essentially identical services provided by municipalities. They contended that this differential treatment lacked rational basis and thus constituted an arbitrary deprivation of property rights without due process, contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies between this ruling and earlier decisions where similarly discriminatory laws were struck down as unconstitutional. Therefore, they disagreed with upholding Alabama’s statute under these circumstances.