In the case of The Washburn and Moen Manufacturing Company v. Norwood, 1891, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Washburn and Moen Manufacturing Company, a wire manufacturer who sued to prevent Massachusetts from taxing its property located within state borders but used for interstate commerce. The company argued that this taxation violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution which gives Congress exclusive power over interstate commerce. In its decision, the court held that while states have authority to tax personal property within their jurisdiction regardless of where it is being used or by whom it is owned; they cannot interfere with or burden interstate commerce through such taxation as per federal law under Commerce Clause. Therefore, any attempt by Massachusetts to impose taxes on goods destined for other states was unconstitutional because it interfered with free trade among states.

In the dissenting opinion for The Washburn and Moen Manufacturing Company v. Norwood, Justice Bradley argued that the Massachusetts statute in question did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. He contended that it was within a state's rights to regulate businesses operating within its borders, especially when such regulation served public interests or welfare. In this case, he believed that limiting work hours for women and children was a valid exercise of police power aimed at protecting their health and wellbeing. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view that these regulations interfered with freedom of contract; instead asserting they were reasonable restrictions given society’s interest in safeguarding vulnerable populations from exploitation or harm due to excessive labor demands.