The U.S. Supreme Court case Consolidated Edison Co. et al. v. National Labor Relations Board et al., 1938, revolved around the issue of whether an employer's free speech rights were violated by a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had found that Consolidated Edison Company was guilty of unfair labor practices for distributing anti-union literature to its employees during a union organizing campaign, and ordered them to cease such activities. The company challenged this order on First Amendment grounds, arguing it infringed upon their right to freedom of speech. However, the Supreme Court upheld the NLRB's decision in a unanimous verdict stating that while employers have free speech rights under Section 8(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), these do not include attempts at coercion or interference with employee self-organization efforts as protected by Section 7 of NLRA. This landmark ruling established important legal precedents regarding corporate communication about unions and set boundaries between employers' free speech rights and workers' right to organize without intimidation or undue influence from management.

In the dissenting opinion for Consolidated Edison Co. et al. v. National Labor Relations Board et al., Justice James Clark McReynolds expressed his disagreement with the majority's decision to uphold the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). He argued that Congress had overstepped its constitutional boundaries by attempting to regulate labor relations within individual states, which he believed was a matter reserved for state law under the Tenth Amendment. Furthermore, he contended that even if Congress did have such power, it should not be used in a way that interferes with freedom of contract and private property rights as protected by Fifth Amendment due process clause - both principles being violated according to him through NLRA provisions allowing unions exclusive bargaining rights and compelling employers into collective agreements against their will respectively.