New State Ice Company v. Liebmann 285 U.S. 262 (1932)
NEW STATE ICE COMPANY v. LIEBMANN 285 U.S. 262 (1932)
An Oklahoma law required ice dealers to obtain a license before entering the market because their business was affected with a public interest. A 6–2 majority could find no exceptional circumstances such as monopoly or emergency—that is, no public interest in regulation—justifying the restriction and so struck down the law as a violation of due process. Echoing Justice oliver wendell holmes's dissent in tyson brother v. banton (1927), Justice louis d. brandeis, with Justice harlan fiske stone concurring, insisted that the assessment of local conditions and requirements was a legislative concern. Seeking to justify a state's right to experiment with social and economic legislation, Brandeis wrote: "… we must be ever on our guard, lest we erect our prejudices into legal principles."