In the case of H. J. Heinz Company v. National Labor Relations Board, 1940, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a decision by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that found H.J Heinz Co., a food processing company, guilty of unfair labor practices under Section 8(1) and (3) of the Wagner Act or National Labor Relations Act. The NLRB had determined that Heinz was interfering with its employees' rights to self-organize and bargain collectively by discouraging membership in a labor organization through acts such as firing union members and spying on employee meetings. The court ruled in favor of NLRB stating that substantial evidence supported these findings against Heinz Co., thereby affirming their authority to prevent unfair labor practices.

In the dissenting opinion for H. J. Heinz Company v. National Labor Relations Board, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold the NLRB's order against Heinz was incorrect and overstepped its authority under the Wagner Act (National Labor Relations Act). The dissenting justices believed that there were no substantial evidence proving that Heinz had engaged in unfair labor practices as accused by NLRB, such as interfering with employees' rights to form or join a union, restraining or coercing employees in exercising these rights, and refusing to bargain collectively with representatives chosen by their employees. They contended that any alleged violations were minor and did not warrant an order from NLRB requiring cessation of all future similar acts regardless of circumstances - which they viewed as overly broad and punitive rather than remedial in nature. Furthermore, they criticized how this case was handled procedurally; specifically questioning why it took nearly two years for charges filed against Heinz to be heard before a trial examiner despite statutory requirements mandating prompt hearings on such matters.