Court upheld a State ban on the sale of liquor. Court recognized that the State has an interest in controlling activity that will injuriously affect the public. However, it alluded to its willingness to review the substance of the State’s legislation:
“[The court’s] solemn duty- to look at the substance of things, whenever they enter upon the inquiry whether the legislation has transcended the limits of its authority…If a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals, or the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects…”
The court evaluates the substantial relation or the lack thereof.