In the case of Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Company in 1910, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a New York state law that distinguished between natural mineral waters and artificially carbonated waters for purposes of regulation. The plaintiff, Natural Carbonic Gas Company, argued that this distinction was arbitrary and violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection under the law. However, the court ruled against them stating that if any possible reason could justify such a classification then it must be upheld as constitutional. In this instance, they found sufficient justification in protecting public health since naturally occurring minerals might have therapeutic properties not present in artificial substitutes while also potentially carrying harmful substances requiring stricter control measures.

In the dissenting opinion for Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Company, Justice Harlan argued that the law in question did not violate equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment because it was based on a reasonable classification of businesses. He believed that there were significant differences between natural mineral spring water companies and artificial carbonated beverage manufacturers which justified different regulations. The former extracted their product directly from nature while the latter used chemicals to create theirs; thus, they posed different potential risks to public health and safety. Therefore, he disagreed with majority's view that this distinction was arbitrary or unreasonable and hence unconstitutional.