The Hipolite Egg Company v. United States case in 1910 revolved around the issue of whether a product could be considered misbranded under the Pure Food and Drug Act if it was sold under a name recognized by consumers but not officially sanctioned by standard authorities. The Hipolite Egg Company had been selling dried egg powder as "egg" which led to charges of misbranding since the product did not meet official standards for fresh eggs. The company argued that their customers understood what they were buying, thus there was no deception involved. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that even though consumers might recognize and understand what they are purchasing, this does not exempt products from adhering to established food standards or being accurately labeled according to those standards.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Hipolite Egg Company v. United States, it was argued that the federal government had overstepped its bounds by interpreting the Pure Food and Drug Act to include a product which was not inherently dangerous or harmful. The justice believed that while Congress did have authority to regulate interstate commerce, this power should not extend to products simply because they may be considered inferior or cheaper substitutes for other goods. He contended that if a product is clearly labeled and does not pose any health risks, then consumers should have the right to choose whether or not they want to purchase it without interference from federal regulations. This interpretation would limit governmental control over consumer choices in favor of free market principles.