The Ribnik v. McBride case in 1927 revolved around the constitutionality of a New Jersey law that prohibited employment agencies from charging more than a certain percentage of the first month's wages as their fee. The plaintiff, an employment agency owner named Ribnik, argued that this law violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection under the law. However, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of such legislation by ruling against Ribnik. The court stated that it was within state power to regulate businesses affecting public welfare and morality, including employment agencies which were seen as exploitative during this period. This decision reinforced states' police powers in regulating business practices for protecting citizens' welfare.

In the dissenting opinion for Ribnik v. McBride, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. argued that the majority's decision to strike down a New Jersey law regulating employment agencies was an overreach of judicial power and a misinterpretation of due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He contended that it is not within the purview of courts to decide on economic policy or determine what constitutes fair business practices; these are matters best left to legislative bodies who have been elected by citizens for this purpose. Furthermore, he asserted that there was no violation of constitutional rights as long as laws do not infringe upon fundamental liberties or discriminate against certain groups without reasonable justification. In his view, states should be allowed broad discretion in exercising their police powers to regulate businesses and protect public welfare.