In the case of Associated Press v. National Labor Relations Board, 1936, the Supreme Court ruled that the Associated Press (AP) violated the National Labor Relations Act by interfering with its employees' rights to form and join labor unions. The AP argued it was not engaged in commerce as defined under this act but rather disseminating news which is protected by First Amendment rights. However, the court held that while press freedom is vital, it does not exempt a news agency from obeying lawful regulations affecting its business side such as labor relations practices. Therefore, even though AP's primary function was to gather and distribute news without bias or influence from external sources including government entities; this did not shield them from complying with federal laws governing employer-employee relationships like other commercial enterprises.

In the dissenting opinion for Associated Press v. National Labor Relations Board, Justice James Clark McReynolds argued that the decision of the majority was a violation of constitutional rights and an overreach by Congress. He contended that forcing employers to engage in collective bargaining with their employees infringed upon freedom of contract, which he believed was protected under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Furthermore, he asserted that Congress had exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause by regulating labor relations within individual states rather than interstate commerce itself. According to him, this case did not involve any form or aspect of interstate commerce; hence it should be beyond federal jurisdiction as per Constitution’s limitations on Congressional power.