The U.S. Supreme Court case Pittston Coal Group, et al. v. Sebben, James, et al., 1988 revolved around the interpretation of a provision in the Black Lung Benefits Act (BLBA). The BLBA was enacted to provide benefits to coal miners who were totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis ("black lung disease") arising from their employment in mines. In this case, a group of coal companies challenged an interpretation by the Department of Labor that allowed miners with less than 10 years' experience and suffering from respiratory impairment but not clinical pneumoconiosis to be presumed eligible for benefits under certain conditions. The Supreme Court ruled against the coal companies stating that such an interpretation was consistent with Congress's intent when it passed amendments broadening eligibility for black lung benefits in 1972 and 1977.

In the dissenting opinion for Pittston Coal Group v. Sebben, Justice Antonin Scalia disagreed with the majority's interpretation of a provision in the Black Lung Benefits Act. He argued that Congress intended to apply stricter eligibility criteria for black lung benefits claims filed after 1982 and did not intend to allow claimants who were denied under previous standards to reapply under more lenient ones. The majority’s decision, he contended, effectively nullified Congressional intent by allowing previously rejected applicants another chance at approval using less stringent requirements. Furthermore, Scalia criticized the Court's reliance on legislative history rather than clear statutory language in reaching its conclusion.