In the case of Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO et al., 1960, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a private company could be exempted from certain licensing requirements under the Atomic Energy Act for constructing and operating a nuclear reactor. The Power Reactor Development Company argued that they should not have to comply with these regulations because their project was privately funded rather than government-funded. However, labor unions disagreed and sued on behalf of workers who would potentially be exposed to radiation if safety standards were not met. The court ruled in favor of the unions stating that all companies must adhere to federal safety regulations when dealing with nuclear energy regardless of funding source or ownership status. This decision underscored that public health concerns take precedence over commercial interests in matters related to atomic energy production.

In the dissenting opinion for Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO et al., Justice Brennan argued that the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) should have authority to suspend a license if it found that operation of a nuclear facility would pose an undue risk to public health or safety. He disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 185 as limiting AEC’s power only until issuance of a construction permit, arguing instead that this section was intended by Congress to limit judicial review rather than restrict regulatory oversight. In his view, allowing private companies unrestricted control over reactor operations after licensing could lead to dangerous situations where economic considerations might override safety concerns in decision-making processes about plant operation and maintenance. This perspective emphasized the importance of maintaining strong governmental regulation in industries involving potential risks on such large scales.