In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Fant Milling Co., the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The dispute arose when Fant Milling Company refused to bargain with a labor union, arguing that it was not properly certified due to irregularities in the election process. The NLRB had dismissed these objections and ordered bargaining, but Fant refused and was charged with unfair labor practices. In its decision, the Supreme Court held that courts should defer to NLRB's expertise on matters within its jurisdiction unless its decisions are irrational or inconsistent with the National Labor Relations Act. Therefore, since there were no such issues found here, it upheld NLRB's order for Fant Milling Company to negotiate with their workers' chosen representative.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. FANT MILLING CO., it was argued that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) overstepped its authority by ordering Fant Milling Co. to cease and desist from unfair labor practices without first determining if these practices were indeed unfair or harmful to employee rights under Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act. The dissent emphasized that while NLRB has broad powers, they are not unlimited and must be exercised within statutory limits. It was further contended that NLRB's order violated due process as it did not provide a fair hearing before imposing sanctions on Fant Milling Co., thereby denying them their right to defend against allegations of wrongdoing.