In the case of Woods, Housing Expediter v. Hills (1947), the United States Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether or not a landlord could increase rent without first obtaining approval from the Housing Expediter under The Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 and its amendments. The court ruled in favor of Woods, stating that landlords must receive permission before increasing rent prices. This decision upheld federal price control laws enacted during World War II to combat inflation and stabilize housing markets for returning veterans and their families. It also reinforced government authority to regulate private industry for public good during times of national emergency.

In the dissenting opinion for Woods, Housing Expediter v. Hills, Justice Robert H. Jackson disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the Emergency Price Control Act and its application to this case. He argued that Congress did not intend for such broad authority to be given to administrative agencies under this law, particularly in relation to rent control regulations. According to him, it was inappropriate for an agency like the Office of Price Administration (OPA) - which had been created as a temporary measure during World War II -  to continue exercising extensive powers over private property rights in peacetime without explicit legislative authorization. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuse of power by unelected bureaucrats and emphasized on judicial review as a necessary check against arbitrary government action.