Cannoli's argument sounds a lot like the case in Lochner v. New York, which is one of the most infamous Supreme Court decisions ever passed, for a variety of reasons.

Essentially, at the time, bakers were required to work for hideously long hours. Bakers who refused to were fired. It was a vicious industry at the time and so New York State passed a law that capped their work at 60 hours per week and 10 hours per day. Given that they were working in hot kitchens around ovens, 10 hours is even more grueling than, say, working at a desk for 10 hours. The Supreme Court cited the "freedom of contract" in a perverse ruling that implied that the bakers actually wanted to work 80-100 hour work weeks.

No one liked the decision. I mean no one. The Left of course hates it because they want one big union, John Reed style, under a red banner of socialism and all that bullshit. However, people on the Right, like me, hate Lochner because it represents the beginning of the pernicious use by the Supreme Court of Substantive Due Process, the monster that strangles all logic and common sense and led us down the path to Roe v. Wade. The only way that the Court could strike down limitations on hours set for public health and safety reasons was to apply the notion that the Fourteenth Amendment provides substantive due process, and this substantive due process was violated. If you ever wonder how the Supreme Court ended up finding a "right" to murder babies in the Constitution, thank Lochner.