In the case of Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, Auditor in 1926, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute regarding taxation and property rights. The State of Ohio had levied taxes against certain properties owned by the Cincinnati Street Railway Company that were used for public transportation purposes but were not directly involved in transporting passengers or goods (such as office buildings). The company argued that these properties should be exempt from taxation under state law because they were necessary for its operations as a public utility. However, the court disagreed with this interpretation and upheld the tax assessments made by local authorities. The Supreme Court held that while some facilities may be essential to running a railway system, it does not mean all such facilities are immune from local taxation if they do not contribute directly to transport services provided by railways. This decision clarified how far-reaching exemptions could extend when considering what constitutes "property used exclusively" for any business purpose within meaning of constitutional provision exempting such property from taxation.

In the dissenting opinion for Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Cincinnati ordinance prohibiting door-to-door solicitation without permission from property owners violated First Amendment rights of free speech and press. The dissenting justices contended that such an ordinance overly restricted these fundamental liberties by requiring prior consent before communication could take place, thereby stifering open discourse in public spaces. They also pointed out that this ruling contradicted previous decisions where similar laws had been struck down as unconstitutional due to their infringement on freedom of expression and assembly. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential misuse or discriminatory enforcement of such ordinances against unpopular groups or ideas.