In the case of United States v. Van Duzee, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over customs duties. The defendant, Van Duzee, imported iron from Canada into the U.S., and was charged with paying import taxes based on an 1883 tariff act that classified "iron in bars" as subject to duty. However, he argued that his shipment should have been exempted under another provision for "railway bars". The lower courts sided with him but upon appeal by the government to the Supreme Court; it was held that despite their intended use for railways, these were still essentially iron bars and thus taxable under said category. Therefore, they reversed previous rulings favoring Van Duzee and upheld his obligation to pay import duties.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Van Duzee case argued that the court should not have jurisdiction over a matter involving state taxes, as it was primarily a local issue. The justice believed that federal courts should only intervene when there is an explicit violation of constitutional rights or federal law, neither of which were present in this case. He also expressed concern about setting a precedent where federal courts could interfere with state tax matters based on vague and indirect connections to interstate commerce or other federal interests. This would undermine states' sovereignty and blur the lines between different levels of government, potentially leading to confusion and conflict down the line.