In the case of United States v. One Distillery et al., 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over property seizure by federal authorities under tax law provisions. The government had seized a distillery and its contents for alleged non-payment of taxes, arguing that it was entitled to do so without providing prior notice or opportunity for hearing before the seizure took place. However, this action was challenged on constitutional grounds as violating due process rights. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, holding that such seizures were constitutionally permissible under certain circumstances where public interest is at stake - specifically when dealing with taxation matters related to alcohol production and sales which have significant implications for public revenue collection. The court reasoned that given their potential impact on public finances and welfare, these cases warranted an exception from usual due process requirements like prior notice or hearing before taking possession of properties involved in tax disputes. This decision thus upheld broad powers for federal authorities in enforcing tax laws against alcohol producers.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. One Distillery et al., 1898, it was argued that the seizure and forfeiture of a distillery due to non-compliance with tax laws were excessive and violated constitutional rights. The justice contended that while Congress has broad powers to levy taxes, this power does not extend to authorizing punitive seizures without proper judicial proceedings. They believed such actions contradicted the Fifth Amendment's protection against deprivation of property without due process of law and Eighth Amendment's prohibition on excessive fines or cruel punishments. Furthermore, they asserted that these penalties should be proportionate to the offense committed; in this case, losing an entire distillery seemed disproportionate punishment for failing to comply with certain tax regulations.