The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen et al. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. et al., 1968 was a case that dealt with labor disputes between the railroad company and its employees' union over job security provisions in their collective bargaining agreement. The Supreme Court held that the Railway Labor Act did not permit federal courts to enforce minor dispute awards made by an adjustment board when such enforcement would conflict with an existing collective bargaining agreement's no-strike clause, thereby limiting judicial intervention in labor disputes within the railway industry. This decision upheld the principle of allowing parties involved in industrial relations to resolve their issues through negotiation and arbitration rather than court action.

In the dissenting opinion for Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co., Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of federal labor law and policy. He contended that Congress intended to protect collective bargaining agreements from judicial interference when it passed the Railway Labor Act (RLA). The RLA, he noted, provides specific procedures for resolving disputes over such agreements but does not authorize courts to issue injunctions in these cases. Furthermore, he asserted that allowing courts to intervene in this way undermines the role of arbitration as a means of settling labor disputes and disruptively interferes with ongoing negotiations between parties. In his view, only an explicit congressional mandate could justify such intervention.