In the Hawker v. New York case of 1897, the United States Supreme Court upheld a New York law that barred convicted felons from practicing medicine. The plaintiff, Dr. Hawker, had been convicted for performing an abortion in 1888 and served his sentence in full before applying to practice medicine again in 1894. His application was denied due to a state law passed after his conviction which prohibited anyone with a felony record from obtaining medical licenses or practicing medicine within the state of New York. Dr. Hawker argued that this law violated both ex post facto laws (which prohibit punishment retroactively) and bills of attainder (laws declaring someone guilty without trial). However, the court ruled against him on both counts stating that such prohibitions were not punitive but regulatory measures designed to protect public health by ensuring only morally fit individuals practiced medicine. The decision established precedent for states' rights to regulate professional licensing based on moral character as well as criminal history.

In the dissenting opinion for Hawker v. New York, Justice Brewer argued that a person should not be perpetually punished or disqualified from practicing their profession due to past mistakes if they have served their sentence and demonstrated reformation. He believed that once an individual has paid his debt to society through punishment, he should be allowed the opportunity to rebuild his life without being forever branded as a criminal. This view was based on the principle of fairness and justice which underpins American law and society. The majority's decision in this case, according to Justice Brewer, contradicted these principles by imposing lifelong consequences on individuals who had already been penalized for their crimes.