In the case of Marder v. Massachusetts, 1963, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required all barbershops to close on Mondays violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiff, Marder, argued that this law unfairly targeted his business without any rational basis for doing so. However, the court ruled in favor of Massachusetts stating that it is within a state's police power to regulate businesses in order to protect public health and welfare. The court found no violation against either clause as they believed there were reasonable grounds for such regulation - ensuring one day off per week for employees in an industry where weekend work is common practice.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Marder v. Massachusetts argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring compulsory vaccination infringed upon individual liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenters contended that while public health is indeed an important concern, it should not be used as a justification for overriding personal freedoms without sufficient evidence of necessity and effectiveness. They further maintained that mandatory vaccinations could potentially lead to abuses of power by government authorities under the guise of protecting public health. Moreover, they expressed concerns about potential risks associated with vaccines and questioned whether these risks were adequately considered when making decisions affecting individuals' bodily autonomy.