The Trump administration said it wanted to send National Guard troops to Portland because the immigration protests there constituted a state of rebellion. The federal Judge Immergut said it didn't constitute a state of rebellion. Referencing what would constitute a state of rebellion, she mentioned the Whiskey Rebellion in the early 1790s when President Washington sent the militia against farmers in Western Pennsylvania who were protesting a federal whiskey tax.
Back then, transport from the western areas was very expensive, so farmers would convert their grain to whiskey in order to transport it easier to market.
But the tax was applied unequally. The big city, big distillers were charged by the barrel produced. But small farmers out in rural areas were charged a flat tax based on the size of their still. So even if in a certain season they made a small amount or maybe even no whiskey, they were still charged the tax and had to pay in hard currency, which was always a problem in rural areas, where most people survived on a barter system.
It was all part of Treasury Secretary Hamilton's plan to consolidate farms and industry into big operations to give the country a solid economy and a stable base to tax. See The book, The Whiskey Rebellion by William Hogeland.
It's like today, when politicians want to tax rich people more. I'm no fan of rich people, but any tax should be the same rate for anyone and I would argue a tax that is not fairly administered would be fair game to be rebelled against.