The U.S. Supreme Court case Chas. Wolff Packing Company v. Court of Industrial Relations of the State of Kansas in 1922 revolved around a dispute over state regulation of labor conditions and wages within private businesses, specifically meatpacking plants in this instance. The Charles Wolff Packing Co., along with other similar companies, challenged the constitutionality of a Kansas law that allowed for such regulations by arguing it violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection under the law. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the packing company, stating that while states do have some power to regulate business practices for public welfare purposes, they cannot interfere excessively with private contractual relationships or set wage levels arbitrarily without violating constitutional protections against deprivation of property without due process.

In the dissenting opinion for Chas. Wolff Packing Company v. Court of Industrial Relations of Kansas, Justice Holmes argued that the state has a legitimate interest in ensuring stable labor relations and preventing strikes, which can disrupt commerce and harm public welfare. He believed that this justified Kansas's law establishing an industrial court to mediate labor disputes and set wages in industries deemed essential to public welfare. Holmes viewed such regulation as part of the state's police power to protect public health, safety, morals or general welfare - even if it interfered with private contracts or property rights under normal circumstances. He also rejected claims that this violated due process rights because he did not see freedom of contract as absolute; rather it could be limited by reasonable regulations serving a valid public purpose.