In the 1923 case of National Association of Window Glass Manufacturers et al. v. United States, the Supreme Court dealt with an antitrust issue related to a trade association's control over production and prices in the window glass industry. The defendants were members of a trade association who had agreed on fixed prices for their products and limited production to maintain these prices, which was challenged by the government as being in violation of Sherman Antitrust Act that prohibits business activities that reduce competition or create monopoly. The court ruled against the manufacturers, stating that their agreement constituted restraint on commerce among states and thus violated federal law. This decision reinforced earlier rulings upholding antitrust laws designed to protect free market competition.

In the dissenting opinion for the National Association of Window Glass Manufacturers v. United States case, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's ruling that a trade agreement among window glass manufacturers to limit production and stabilize prices constituted an illegal restraint on trade under the Sherman Act. He argued that such agreements were not inherently harmful to competition or consumers, but rather could promote efficiency and stability in certain industries. Furthermore, he contended that it was inappropriate for courts to interfere in these types of business arrangements without clear evidence of harm or abuse. According to him, this decision would have far-reaching implications for other industries where similar agreements are common practice.