The dissent in this case relies upon a string of precedent including Hoke v. United States and the oleomargarine case McCray v. United States, saying that the result should be compelled by Champion v. Ames. Although this decision was upheld four years later in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Company, the Court later explicitly declared it bad law in United States v. Darby. In probably the only important majority opinion of his career, Justice William Rufus Day stressed a rather formal distinction between the right to regulate and the right to "forbid" and "destroy." Congress responded to this decision by passing a statute which levied an excise tax of 10 percent on all net profits instead of the outright prohibition attempted by the Keating-Owen Act, but that was rejected as well. FTP, name this 1918 case which struck 
The dissent in this case relies upon a string of precedent including Hoke v. United States and the oleomargarine case McCray v. United States, saying that the result should be compelled by Champion v. Ames. Although this decision was upheld four years later in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Company, the Court later explicitly declared it bad law in United States v. Darby. In probably the only important majority opinion of his career, Justice William Rufus Day stressed a rather formal distinction between the right to regulate and the right to "forbid" and "destroy." Congress responded to this decision by passing a statute which levied an excise tax of 10 percent on all net profits instead of the outright prohibition attempted by the Keating-Owen Act, but that was rejected as well. FTP, name this 1918 case which struck down the Child Labor Act as an usurpation of state police power.
The dissent in this case relies upon a string of precedent including Hoke v. United States and the oleomargarine case McCray v. United States, saying that the result should be compelled by Champion v. Ames.
{Hammer v. Dagenhart}