The U.S. Supreme Court case Sioux City Bridge Company v. Dakota County, Nebraska in 1922 revolved around the issue of whether a state could tax an interstate bridge owned by a private company. The Sioux City Bridge Company had built and operated a toll bridge across the Missouri River between Iowa and Nebraska, which was used for both intrastate and interstate commerce. Dakota County in Nebraska sought to impose property taxes on the portion of the bridge within its jurisdiction but was challenged by the company who argued that this would interfere with interstate commerce, thus violating federal law. However, upon reaching court verdicts at various levels including appeals courts; it was ultimately decided by The U.S Supreme Court that such taxation did not infringe upon or obstruct interstate trade as feared by Sioux City Bridge Co., hence ruling out any violation against federal laws governing inter-state commerce. Therefore, it upheld Dakota County's right to levy taxes on parts of infrastructure even if they were part of an inter-state network - setting precedence for future cases involving similar disputes over local versus national authority in matters related to commercial activities spanning multiple states.

In the dissenting opinion for Sioux City Bridge Company v. Dakota County, Nebraska, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings of the Court and violated principles of federalism. He contended that states have a right to tax property within their borders and this includes bridges crossing interstate rivers. The bridge in question was physically located in both Iowa and Nebraska; therefore, it should be taxable by both states according to their respective laws. By ruling otherwise, he believed the court had overstepped its boundaries by interfering with state taxation powers without clear constitutional or legal justification.