The U.S. Supreme Court case Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States in 1932 revolved around the issue of import duties on chemical fertilizers imported from Norway by the plaintiff, Norwegian Nitrogen Products Company (NNPC). The NNPC argued that their product should be classified under a provision with lower tariffs as it was not explicitly mentioned in any other category, while the government contended that it fell under a different classification with higher rates due to its composition and usage. The court ruled in favor of the government, stating that even though there wasn't an explicit mention of this particular fertilizer type within tariff classifications, based on its characteristics and common use as fertilizer, it could reasonably fall under a more general category which carried higher duties than what NNPC claimed for their imports.

In the dissenting opinion for Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States, Justice Stone argued that the Tariff Act of 1922 should be interpreted in a way that would not impose an additional duty on imported goods simply because they were sold at less than fair value when there was no evidence of injury to domestic industry. He contended that Congress did not intend to provide protection against foreign competition unless it could be shown that such competition was harmful or unfair, and he believed this interpretation was supported by both legislative history and statutory language. Furthermore, he disagreed with majority's view about how "fair value" should be determined under the act; instead of using American sales prices as a benchmark, Justice Stone suggested considering factors like cost of production or general market conditions in exporter's home country.