Volume 301 — United States Reports

National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, 301 U.S. 1 (1937), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act. The case marked a major expansion in the Court's interpretation of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause and effectively spelled the end to the Court's striking down of New Deal economic legislation.

United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324 (1937), was a dispute between the federal executive branch and the State of New York over property rights to a deposit from a former Russian corporation with August Belmont & Company, a private New York City banking firm. Belmont established executive predominance over state laws and constitutions in the sphere of foreign policy, and allocated the constitutional power for initiating executive agreements solely to the president of the United States.

Held: when the facts are viewed in combination, to have been “personally” and “primarily” engaged in farming operations. He was in that business or in none. He was either a farmer or a man of leisure. Cf. In re Glick, 26 F. (2d) 398 , 400. But the stipulation makes it clear that this last he certainly was not.

Steward Machine Company v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548 (1937), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the unemployment compensation provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935, which established the federal taxing structure that was designed to induce states to adopt laws for funding and payment of unemployment compensation. The decision signaled the Court's acceptance of a broad interpretation of Congressional power to influence state laws.

Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that held that Social Security was constitutionally permissible as an exercise of the federal power to spend for the general welfare and so did not contravene the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Court's 7–2 decision defended the constitutionality of the old-age benefit program of the Social Security Act of 1935 by requiring only welfare spending to be for the common benefit, as distinguished from some mere local purpose. It affirmed a District Court decree that held that the tax upon employees was not properly at issue and that the tax upon employers was constitutional.