In the Southwestern Brewery and Ice Company v. Schmidt case in 1912, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving labor union activities. The Southwestern Brewery and Ice Company had sued several of its employees who were members of a local brewers' union for conspiring to damage its business by encouraging other employees to join their strike. The company argued that this was an illegal restraint of trade under Texas law. However, the defendants claimed they were merely exercising their right to organize as workers. The court sided with the workers, ruling that peaceful strikes are not an unlawful restraint of trade or commerce under either federal or state laws. It held that labor is not a commodity or article of commerce within the meaning of anti-trust legislation; therefore, actions taken by unions cannot be considered restraints on commercial trade. This decision affirmed workers' rights to form unions and engage in collective bargaining without being accused of violating antitrust laws designed primarily for regulating businesses rather than individuals.

In the dissenting opinion for Southwestern Brewery and Ice Company v. Schmidt, Justice Hughes argued that the Texas law in question did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause as it was intended to protect consumers from deceptive practices. He believed that there were substantial differences between manufacturers who produced their goods within a state and those who imported them from elsewhere, which justified different regulations for each group. The justice also contended that states had a right to regulate businesses operating within their borders to prevent fraud or deception, even if this resulted in some burden on interstate commerce. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's decision striking down the Texas statute requiring beer labels to indicate where beer was brewed.