1. Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB
U.S. Supreme Court
1951

2. Quotes From Universal Camera
“Want of certainty in judicial review of Labor Board decisions partly reflects the intractability of any formula to furnish definiteness of content for all the impalpable factors involved in judicial review. But in part doubts as to the nature of the reviewing power and uncertainties in its application derive from history, and to that extent an elucidation of this history may clear them away.” (340 U.S. 474, 477 )
“The Court of Appeals deemed itself bound by the Board's rejection of the examiner's findings because the court considered these findings not ‘as unassailable as a master's.’ They are not.” (340 U.S. 474, 492 )

3. Two Basic Issues
Narrow - Effect of change in NLRA language associated with T-H amendments
Broad - Scope of Judicial Review

4. Change in NLRA Language
Section 10 (e)
from
“(t)he findings of the Board with respect to questions of fact if supported by evidence shall be conclusive.” to
“(t)he findings of the Board with respect to questions of fact if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole shall be conclusive.”

5. Evidentiary Standards
Beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal trial standard)
Clear and convincing evidence
Preponderance of the evidence (>50%)
Substantial evidence on the record as whole
Substantial evidence
Some evidence

6. Responsibilities Board Courts (on review)
To make decision based on “substantial evidence considered on the record as a whole”
To interpret the NLRA
Courts (on review)
Job
To determine if Board made its decision based on “substantial evidence on the record as a whole”
To take this task seriously
Nonjob
To substitute its judgment for that of Board if views “fairly conflicting”

7. Summary Taft-Hartley Change in evidentiary standard for NLRB decisions
Obligations of the courts to review Board decisions
responsibly
narrowly