In the Myers et al. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 1937 case, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, stating that it was not subject to an order from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had previously ordered Bethlehem to reinstate workers who were fired for union activities and cease its anti-union practices. However, the court held that since Congress did not explicitly grant enforcement powers to NLRB when it established this body under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (also known as Wagner Act), NLRB's orders could only be enforced by a federal court upon review and approval. This decision highlighted a significant limitation on NLRB's authority until Congress amended Wagner Act in 1947 through Taft-Hartley Act which granted direct enforcement power to NLRB.

In the dissenting opinion for Myers et al. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act, arguing that it was not Congress' intention to give such broad powers to a single administrative body like the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). He believed that by allowing NLRB to both make and enforce rules, it violated separation of powers principles inherent in U.S Constitution. Additionally, he argued against giving deference to an agency’s interpretations of laws they are charged with enforcing as this could lead towards unchecked governmental power. Furthermore, he expressed concern over due process rights being infringed upon because employers were forced into collective bargaining without having their day in court first.