In the case of Office Employees International Union, Local No. 11, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board (1956), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The dispute arose when an employer refused to bargain with a union that had been certified by NLRB as a representative for its employees because it believed that some ineligible voters participated in the election process. The NLRB found this refusal to be an unfair labor practice and ordered bargaining to commence immediately. On appeal, however, both lower courts set aside this order on grounds that there was no substantial evidence supporting it. When brought before the Supreme Court, they reversed these decisions stating that judicial review is limited under such circumstances and should not have been used here where there was ample evidence supporting NLRB's decision.

In the dissenting opinion for Office Employes International Union, Local No. 11, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board (1956), Justice Frankfurter disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Taft-Hartley Act. He argued that Congress intended to prohibit only those secondary boycotts which directly threatened neutral employers with substantial economic harm if they continued doing business with a primary employer involved in a labor dispute. The union's peaceful picketing at an entrance shared by both the primary and secondary employers did not meet this standard because it was aimed primarily at persuading customers not to patronize the primary employer rather than coercing or restraining trade between either employer and third parties. Therefore, he believed that such conduct should be protected under First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly as well as traditional principles of collective bargaining.