The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. et al., 1965 was a case that revolved around the interpretation and application of the Railway Labor Act (RLA). The dispute arose when the railroad companies sought to change existing rules regarding firemen employment on diesel locomotives, which would result in job losses for many firemen. The unions representing these workers resisted this move and negotiations reached an impasse leading to arbitration under RLA provisions. However, during arbitration proceedings, one member from each side could not agree on a neutral referee resulting in intervention by National Mediation Board (NMB) who appointed a referee without consulting either party as required by law. The Supreme Court held that NMB's failure to consult with both parties before appointing an arbitrator violated procedural requirements outlined in Section 5 First (c) of RLA rendering subsequent award voidable at suit of either party claiming prejudice thereby reversing lower court decisions upholding validity of award.

In the dissenting opinion for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co., Justice Black disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold an injunction against a railroad union strike. He argued that Congress had not intended for courts to intervene in labor disputes when it passed the Norris-LaGuardia Act, which limited federal courts' power to issue such injunctions. Furthermore, he contended that allowing judicial intervention would undermine collective bargaining and disrupt balance between employers and employees established by national labor policy. He also pointed out that there was no evidence of irreparable harm caused by strikes as required under law for issuing an injunction; instead, only speculative damages were presented before court. Thus, according to him, granting injunctive relief in this case violated both legislative intent and statutory requirements.