In the 1897 case of Holden v. Hardy, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Utah law that limited miners and smelters to an eight-hour workday. The court ruled in favor of Hardy, arguing that such restrictions were within a state's police power because they protected workers' health and safety. The plaintiff, Holden, argued that this law violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights by depriving him of liberty and property without due process of law - specifically his freedom to contract labor for any amount of time he saw fit. However, the court disagreed with this argument stating that while individuals have certain fundamental rights under the Constitution; these are not absolute but subject to reasonable regulation for public good or welfare.

In the dissenting opinion for Holden v. Hardy, Justice Brewer argued that the Utah law limiting miners' workdays to eight hours was unconstitutional. He believed it violated workers' rights to freely contract their labor and employers' rights to conduct business as they saw fit. Brewer contended that this legislation interfered with personal liberty and property rights without sufficient justification in protecting public health or safety, thus overstepping its constitutional bounds. He also expressed concern about potential slippery slope effects of such laws on other industries and professions not currently deemed hazardous enough for similar regulation but could be subjected under future interpretations of what constitutes a dangerous occupation.