In the case of Mitchell, Secretary of Labor v. Bekins Van & Storage Co., 1956, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of James P. Mitchell, then Secretary of Labor, who had brought a lawsuit against Bekins Van & Storage Company for alleged violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The company was accused of failing to pay its employees overtime compensation as required by law and argued that it was exempt from these requirements due to being involved in agricultural labor. However, the court found that their activities did not fall within this exemption because they were primarily engaged in commercial operations rather than agriculture-related tasks such as farming or harvesting crops. Therefore, they were obligated to comply with FLSA regulations regarding employee wages and hours worked.

In the dissenting opinion for Mitchell v. Bekins Van & Storage Co., Justice Frankfurter argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of federalism and labor law. He contended that Congress, in passing the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), did not intend to regulate local activities such as moving services within a state but rather aimed at controlling interstate commerce. The justice believed that applying FLSA to purely intrastate business operations would lead to an unwarranted expansion of federal power over areas traditionally governed by states' rights. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential negative impacts on small businesses due to increased regulatory burdens imposed by this broad interpretation of FLSA jurisdiction.