In the case of WHYY, Inc. v. Borough of Glassboro et al., 1968, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute between a public broadcasting company and a local government over property taxes. The broadcaster, WHYY Inc., owned land in Glassboro that was used for transmitting signals to its audience in Philadelphia and Delaware. However, it did not produce any programming on this site or generate revenue from it directly. When the borough assessed property tax on this land, WHYY argued that they were exempt under New Jersey law as an educational institution since their primary purpose was to educate the public through non-commercial television broadcasts. The court ruled against WHYY's claim for exemption from taxation based on its status as an educational institution because it failed to meet two key criteria: first being "conducted for profit" and secondly having "a regular faculty". Despite acknowledging that some aspects of their operation could be considered educational in nature (such as providing instructional programs), these activities alone weren't sufficient enough to qualify them as an educationally purposed entity according to state laws at that time.

In the dissenting opinion for WHYY, INC. v. Borough of Glassboro et al., 1968, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a non-profit educational corporation to be exempt from local property taxes could potentially lead to an unfair burden on other taxpayers in the community. The dissenting justices believed that such exemptions should only apply if there is clear and unequivocal language in state law indicating this intention. They expressed concern about potential abuse of tax exemption status by organizations claiming educational purposes but not primarily serving public interests or providing substantial benefits to their communities. Furthermore, they emphasized that decisions regarding tax policy are best left up to legislatures rather than courts due to their complex nature and potential impact on public finances.