In the case of Ewing v. City of Leavenworth, 1912, the United States Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a city ordinance in Leavenworth, Kansas that prohibited pool halls from operating on Sundays was constitutional. The plaintiff argued that this law violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection under the law because it singled out one type of business for regulation while leaving others untouched. However, the court ruled against him stating that cities have broad powers to regulate businesses within their borders as part of their police power and such regulations do not violate any constitutional rights if they are reasonable and not arbitrary or discriminatory. In this instance, since there were legitimate public health reasons for limiting pool hall operations (such as preventing noise disturbances), the court found no violation of Mr.Ewing's constitutional rights.

In the dissenting opinion for Ewing v. City of Leavenworth, it was argued that the city's decision to fire Mr. Ewing from his position as a police officer based on his political affiliations violated his constitutional rights. The justice believed that public servants should not be dismissed solely because of their political beliefs or party affiliation unless these directly interfere with their ability to perform their duties effectively and impartially. This view held that such dismissals undermine democratic principles by discouraging free expression and participation in politics among public employees, which could ultimately lead to an undemocratic system where government jobs are awarded or denied based on loyalty to a particular party rather than merit or competence.