The case of Mark Howlett, a minor represented by his mother Elizabeth Howlett, versus Scott Rose, Superintendent of Schools for Pinellas County in Florida and others (1989), revolved around the issue of religious freedom in public schools. The plaintiff argued that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was prohibited from distributing religious literature at school. He claimed this prohibition constituted an infringement on his right to free speech and exercise of religion. However, the defendants contended that such distribution could potentially disrupt educational activities and infringe upon other students' rights not to be subjected to unwanted proselytizing within a public institution like a school. They also raised concerns about maintaining neutrality towards all religions as required by law in public institutions.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Mark Howlett v. Scott Rose argued that the majority's decision to uphold a school district policy prohibiting students from participating in extracurricular activities if they fail any course was flawed. The dissenters believed this policy violated students' rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it disproportionately affected disadvantaged and minority students who may struggle academically due to factors beyond their control such as poverty or lack of access to quality education resources. They also contended that participation in extracurricular activities can be crucial for these struggling students, providing them with motivation and opportunities for personal growth which could help improve their academic performance. Therefore, by denying these benefits based on academic performance alone without considering other factors contributing to student failure, they argued that the school district was not treating all its pupils equally and fairly.