Facts of the Case
The family of deceased Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder filed a lawsuit against members of the Westboro Baptist Church who picketed at his funeral. The family accused the church and its founders of defamation, invasion of privacy and the intentional infliction of emotional distress for displaying signs that said, "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Fag troops" at Snyder's funeral. U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett awarded the family $5 million in damages, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the judgment violated the First Amendment's protections on religious expression. The church members' speech is protected, "notwithstanding the distasteful and repugnant nature of the words."
Questions
Does the First Amendment protect protesters at a funeral from liability for intentionally inflicting emotional distress on the family of the deceased?
Conclusions
-
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision in an opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. The Court held that the First Amendment shields those who stage a protest at the funeral of a military service member from liability. Justice Stephen J. Breyer filed a concurring opinion in which he wrote that while he agreed with the majority's conclusion in the case, "I do not believe that our First Amendment analysis can stop at that point." Justice Samuel Alito filed a lone dissent, in which he argued: "Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case."
The Radicalism of Jennifer Abruzzo’s Free Speech Doctrine
The new NLRB General Counsel is trying to overthrow decades of precedent and expand secondary boycotts under a First Amendment pretext. The NLRB will probably let her. Will the courts?
Do unions have a First Amendment right to drag third parties into their labor disputes?...
Compelled Speech in Masterpiece Cakeshop: What the Supreme Court’s June 2018 Decisions Tell Us About the Unresolved Questions
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the unresolved compelled-speech questions in Masterpiece Cakeshop v....
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky Strikes Down a Vague Ban on Speech in Polling Places, But Future Bans May Be Upheld
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the Supreme Court’s opinion in Minnesota Voters Alliance...
Docket Watch: The People of the State of Illinois v. Walter Relerford
After interning, Walter Relerford interviewed for a position and continued sending emails and phone calls...
Missing the Point
Free Speech before the Supreme Court
If any place should be available for peaceful, non-disruptive protest, it is the plaza in...
Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Engage Volume 15, Issue 1 February 2014
Note from the Editor: This article is a discussion about the Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby...
Snyder v. Phelps - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
SCOTUScast 03-04-11 featuring Calvin R. Massey
On March 2, 2011, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Snyder v. Phelps. The...
Snyder v. Phelps - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
SCOTUScast 11-30-10 featuring Calvin R. Massey
On October 6, 2010 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Snyder v. Phelps. The...
Snyder v. Phelps
Faculty Terrace
United States Supreme Court Update: A Review of the 2010-2011 Term
Sullivans Steakhouse 300 Colorado StreetAustin,
United States Supreme Court Term in Review
The Black Labrador 4100 Montrose Boulevard (at Richmond)