In the 1912 case of Luke v. Smith, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state law in West Virginia that required all corporations to pay their employees in legal tender (i.e., cash) violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiff, Mr. Luke, argued that this law unfairly targeted his business and others like it because they paid their workers partially through company store credits instead of solely in cash. However, the court ruled against him stating that such laws were within states' rights to regulate businesses for public welfare purposes and did not violate any constitutional protections or rights under equal protection clause of fourteenth amendment. Therefore, companies could be legally obligated by state laws to pay their employees entirely in legal currency rather than other forms of compensation.

In the dissenting opinion for Luke v. Smith, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law prohibiting interracial marriage in Arizona violated both due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenters believed that this law unjustly interfered with personal liberty and private rights without sufficient justification. They contended that there was no compelling state interest strong enough to warrant such an intrusion into personal relationships, asserting instead that laws like these were rooted more in prejudice than any legitimate public concern. Furthermore, they maintained that by treating individuals differently based on race, the statute also failed to provide equal protection under the law as required by constitutionally guaranteed rights.