In the case of Roberts & Schaefer Company v. Emmerson, Secretary of State of Illinois (1925), the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving corporate taxation. The plaintiff, Roberts & Schaefer Company, was an out-of-state corporation that had been conducting business in Illinois and challenged its tax assessment by the state's Secretary of State. The company argued that it should not be taxed as heavily because much of its property was located outside Illinois and thus beyond the state's jurisdiction to tax. However, the court rejected this argument stating that since they were doing business within Illinois' borders and benefiting from services provided by the state government such as police protection or public infrastructure use; therefore they could be subjected to taxes based on their total capital stock value rather than just what is physically present in-state. This decision upheld states' rights to levy taxes against corporations operating within their boundaries regardless where their physical assets are located.

In the dissenting opinion for Roberts & Schaefer Company v. Emmerson, Secretary of State of Illinois, Justice Holmes argued that the state had a legitimate interest in regulating corporations and ensuring they were not used to evade personal liability. He contended that if a corporation was formed merely as an instrumentality or adjunct of another company, it could be treated as such by the state. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and believed that states should have more leeway in determining what constitutes fair treatment under their own laws. In his view, this case did not involve any deprivation of property without due process but rather represented a valid exercise of state power to regulate corporate behavior within its jurisdiction.