The U.S. Supreme Court case "In the Matter of the National Labor Relations Board" in 1937 was a significant decision that affirmed the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) or Wagner Act, which had been enacted by Congress in 1935 to protect workers' rights to form unions and engage in collective bargaining. The court ruled that Congress had not overstepped its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause when it passed this legislation. This ruling came after several businesses challenged NLRA's validity, arguing it infringed on their freedom of contract and exceeded Congressional power under the commerce clause. However, Justice Charles Evans Hughes delivered an opinion for a unanimous court upholding NLRA as a valid exercise of congressional power to regulate interstate commerce because labor-management disputes affected interstate commerce directly enough for federal regulation.

In the dissenting opinion for the case "In The Matter of The National Labor Relations Board, 1937", Justice James Clark McReynolds expressed his concern that the majority's decision would give too much power to administrative agencies. He argued that this could potentially undermine constitutional checks and balances by allowing these agencies to both create and enforce laws. McReynolds also contended that such a concentration of power was not what the framers of Constitution intended when they established separate branches of government with distinct roles and responsibilities. Furthermore, he believed it was inappropriate for courts to defer so heavily to agency interpretations without conducting their own independent analysis. This, he feared, could lead to an erosion in judicial authority and independence.