In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. International Rice Milling Co., Inc., 1950, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had found that International Rice Milling Co. was guilty of unfair labor practices under Section 8(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act by discriminating against employees who were union members, thereby discouraging membership in a labor organization. The company argued it was not subject to this law as its business did not affect interstate commerce sufficiently enough to warrant federal jurisdiction. However, evidence showed that a significant portion of their rice products were sold and shipped across state lines which brought them within reach of federal regulation. Therefore, the court upheld NLRB's decision asserting that such discrimination constituted an unfair labor practice affecting commerce within meaning of act.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of National Labor Relations Board v. International Rice Milling Co., Inc., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold an order from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against International Rice Milling Company, which required them to cease and desist from discouraging membership in a labor organization, was incorrect. The dissent contended that there wasn't substantial evidence on record supporting NLRB’s findings that company had interfered with its employees' rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act by discharging certain employees due to their union activities or sympathies. Furthermore, they disagreed with NLRB's conclusion about company’s refusal to bargain collectively with representatives chosen by its workers as being unlawful interference and coercion violating Sections 8(1) and 8(5). They believed this interpretation expanded powers granted under Wagner Act beyond what Congress intended; thus undermining employers’ freedom of speech and association protected by First Amendment.