In the case of The State of Minnesota v. Bachelder, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state could tax bonds issued by another state. At issue were bonds issued by Wisconsin in 1857 and held by citizens of Minnesota. The court found that states do not have the power to tax other states' obligations, as this would be an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce and violate principles of comity between states. Furthermore, it was determined that such taxation would interfere with Congress's exclusive authority over foreign and interstate commerce under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Ultimately, the court ruled against Minnesota's attempt to impose taxes on Wisconsin's bonds held within its borders; however, they did note that if a bondholder voluntarily brought their securities into a taxing jurisdiction then they may be subject to taxation there depending on local laws or regulations governing such matters.

In the case of The State of Minnesota v. Bachelder, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether or not a state could tax bonds issued by another state. Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in this case, arguing that states should be able to issue their own bonds without interference from other states. He argued that allowing one state to interfere with another's bond issuance would create an imbalance between them and lead to potential conflicts between them. Furthermore, he argued that it would be unconstitutional for one state to impose taxes on securities issued by another because such taxation is beyond its jurisdiction and power under the Constitution. In conclusion, Justice Field believed that each individual state should have autonomy over its own financial affairs and thus concluded his dissent against allowing Minnesota’s taxation of South Carolina’s bonds as unconstitutional