In the case of Ewing v. Gardner, 1950, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a federal law that provided for benefits to be paid to widows of World War II veterans could also apply to those who were not legally married but had been in long-term relationships with deceased veterans. The Federal Security Administrator argued that only legal spouses should receive these benefits while Gardner, executor of a veteran's estate whose partner claimed she was entitled to his benefits, contended otherwise. The court ruled in favor of the Federal Security Administrator stating that Congress intended for "widow" under this law to mean a woman who was legally married at the time her husband died and therefore did not include women involved in non-marital relationships with deceased veterans.

In the dissenting opinion for Ewing v. Gardner, Justice Douglas argued that the Federal Security Administrator did not have the authority to determine whether a drug was misbranded under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. He contended that this power should be reserved for courts rather than administrative agencies. Furthermore, he disagreed with majority's interpretation of "labeling" in relation to promotional materials sent separately from a product package - asserting it could lead to an overly broad application of law enforcement powers by federal authorities. In his view, such expansive interpretation would infrive upon freedom of speech rights protected by First Amendment as it might suppress or control scientific debate on matters related to public health.