In the Fowler v. Rhode Island case of 1952, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a Jehovah's Witness who was convicted for violating an ordinance in Pawtucket, Rhode Island by preaching in a public park had his First Amendment rights violated. The city allowed other religious groups to conduct services in the park but prohibited Jehovah’s Witnesses from doing so. The court held that this selective restriction on speech based on its content was unconstitutional and infringed upon Fowler's freedom of speech and religion as protected under the First Amendment. This decision reinforced principles established earlier by cases such as Cantwell v Connecticut (1940) which emphasized state neutrality towards religion and highlighted how government cannot favor one religion over another or restrict individual religious practices without demonstrating compelling interest.

In the dissenting opinion for Fowler v. Rhode Island, Justice Frankfurter disagreed with the majority's ruling that a Jehovah's Witness was unfairly convicted of violating an ordinance prohibiting religious services in public parks without permission. He argued that there was no evidence to suggest that Fowler would have been denied permission had he sought it or that his conviction represented discrimination against his particular religion. Instead, Frankfurter believed this case revolved around maintaining order and preventing potential disturbances in public spaces rather than infringing upon freedom of speech or religion. He also pointed out inconsistencies within the court’s decision-making process when dealing with similar cases involving free speech and assembly rights, suggesting a need for clearer guidelines on these issues.