In the case of Charles Sherwin et al. v. United States, 1924, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal law that imposed taxes on future inheritances violated constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the Fifth Amendment. The appellants were heirs to an estate who argued that this tax legislation unfairly targeted them for taxation before they had actually received any inheritance money or property from their deceased relative's estate. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, upholding the constitutionality of such laws. It reasoned that Congress has broad powers to levy taxes under Article I Section 8 of Constitution and it is within its purview to impose taxes on future inheritances as part of its power "to lay and collect Taxes." Furthermore, it found no violation against due process or equal protection clauses since these laws apply uniformly across all potential beneficiaries without discrimination. This decision affirmed congressional authority over taxation matters while also clarifying how far this power extends into areas like inheritance planning.

In the dissenting opinion for Charles Sherwin et al. v. United States, Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's interpretation of the Sherman Act was too broad and could potentially criminalize normal business activities. He contended that it was not Congress' intention to punish individuals who merely acted in their own interest without any intent to monopolize or restrain trade. Furthermore, he disagreed with the notion that a person could be held criminally liable under antitrust laws simply because they knew their actions might have an adverse effect on competition. According to Justice McReynolds, such a standard would make it nearly impossible for anyone involved in commerce to avoid violating these laws unintentionally.