In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Crompton-Highland Mills, Inc., 1948, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The issue at hand was whether an employer could lawfully discharge employees for joining a labor union and then refuse to rehire them after they had renounced their union membership. The NLRB held that such actions were unfair labor practices under sections 8(1) and 8(3) of the National Labor Relations Act as it discouraged membership in a labor organization. However, this decision was reversed by Circuit Court on grounds that there was no substantial evidence supporting NLRB's findings. Upon reaching Supreme Court, it reinstated NLRB's original ruling stating that substantial evidence existed showing company’s anti-union bias which led to workers' dismissal and refusal to reemploy them even after disassociating from Union.

The dissenting opinion in the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Crompton-Highland Mills, Inc., argued that the majority's decision to uphold an order by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was incorrect. The dissenters believed that this ruling gave too much power to the NLRB and overstepped its authority under the Wagner Act. They contended that while it is within NLRB’s purview to prevent unfair labor practices, it does not have a mandate or jurisdiction to dictate specific terms of employment contracts such as wage rates or working hours. This should be left for negotiation between employers and employees or their representatives without interference from government agencies like NLRB unless there are clear violations of law involved. The dissenting justices feared this ruling could set a dangerous precedent where administrative bodies might assume powers beyond what was intended by Congress.