In the case of Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Antonio Jackson (2009), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Rent-A-Center by a 5-4 vote. The dispute arose when Antonio Jackson filed a lawsuit against his employer, Rent-A-Center, alleging racial discrimination and retaliation which is contrary to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, as part of his employment contract with Rent-A-Center was an arbitration agreement that required all disputes be resolved through arbitration rather than litigation in court. The key issue before the Supreme Court was whether it was for courts or arbitrators to decide if an arbitration agreement is unconscionable and thus unenforceable under Nevada law - where this case originated from. The majority opinion held that unless a party specifically challenges the validity of the agreement to arbitrate then it's presumed valid and must be decided by an arbitrator not a court - even if what’s being challenged is its fairness or conscionability. This ruling reinforced businesses' ability to use mandatory arbitration clauses within their contracts effectively limiting employees’ access to bring claims like discrimination before courts but instead have them heard privately via agreed upon arbitrators.

In the dissenting opinion for Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Antonio Jackson (2009), Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to allow a company to unilaterally decide whether an arbitration agreement is enforceable undermines the Federal Arbitration Act's purpose of ensuring fair and voluntary agreements between parties with equal bargaining power. He contended that by allowing companies to include clauses in their contracts stating they can determine if disputes are subject to arbitration, it essentially allows them to avoid judicial review entirely - something he believed Congress did not intend when passing the Act. Furthermore, he expressed concern over how this could impact employees or consumers who may feel pressured into signing such agreements without fully understanding their implications or having any real ability to negotiate terms.