In the United States v. Morgan case of 1953, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, upholding its authority to regulate prices under certain circumstances. The dispute began when Secretary of Agriculture Claude Wickard set a maximum price for livestock during World War II as part of his wartime powers granted by Congress. Livestock dealer Fred Morgan sued on grounds that this was an overreach and violated due process rights because he wasn't given a chance to challenge it before it took effect. However, Justice Stanley Reed wrote for the unanimous court that while administrative agencies must provide fair hearings, they don't have to do so before issuing regulations if there's another opportunity later on to challenge them - which there was in this case through judicial review after enforcement action is taken against those who violate such rules or orders.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Morgan, Justice Jackson disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a district court ruling that had set milk prices based on an administrative hearing record. He argued that this violated due process rights because it did not allow for cross-examination of witnesses or other procedural safeguards typically found in judicial proceedings. Furthermore, he contended that the Secretary of Agriculture should not have been allowed to act as both prosecutor and judge in setting these prices, which was inherently unfair and biased. Additionally, he criticized the majority's reliance on "legislative facts" rather than evidence presented at trial to justify their decision.