# Supreme Court rules in favor of Westboro protests **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 2, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222 "2011-03-02T16:15:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/41 "2011-03-02T21:33:54Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The lawyers can explain it better but generally their function is to rule on a question regarding a law. What did they rule on here? I am a lawyer. One of their functions is to rule on _questions of law_, not “a question regarding a law.” This is what they held, from the digest portion of the opinion: > [@](#): > > Held: The First Amendment shields Westboro from tort liability for itspicketing in this case. … > > (a) The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment can serve as a defense in state tort suits, including suits for intentional infliction of emotional distress. … Whether the First Amendment prohibits holding Westboro liable for its speech in this case turns largely on whether that speech is of public or private concern, as determined by all the circumstances of the case. … Although the boundaries of what constitutes speech on matters of public concern are not well defined, this Court has said that speech is of public concern when it can “be fairly considered as relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community,” … or when it “is a subject of general interest and of value and concern to the public,” … > > To determine whether speech is of public or private concern, this Court must independently examine the “ ‘content, form, and context,’ ” of the speech “ ‘as revealed by the whole record.’ ” … > > The “content” of Westboro’s signs plainly relates to public, rather than private, matters. The placards highlighted issues of public im-port—the political and moral conduct of the United States and itscitizens, the fate of the Nation, homosexuality in the military, and scandals involving the Catholic clergy—and Westboro conveyed its views on those issues in a manner designed to reach as broad a publicaudience as possible. Even if a few of the signs were viewed as con-taining messages related to a particular individual, that would notchange the fact that the dominant theme of Westboro’s demonstra-tion spoke to broader public issues. … > > The “context” of the speech—its connection with Matthew Snyder’sfuneral—cannot by itself transform the nature of Westboro’s speech. The signs reflected Westboro’s condemnation of much in modern society, and it cannot be argued that Westboro’s use of speech on public issues was in any way contrived to insulate a personal attack on Snyder from liability. … > > The “special protection” afforded to what Westboro said, in the whole context of how and where it chose to say it, cannot be overcome by a jury finding that the picketing was “outrageous” for purposes of applying the state law tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress. That would pose too great a danger that the jury would punish Westboro for its views on matters of public concern. For all these reasons, the jury verdict imposing tort liability on Westboro for inten-tional infliction of emotional distress must be set aside. … > > (b) Snyder also may not recover for the tort of intrusion upon seclusion. He argues that he was a member of a captive audience at his son’s funeral, but the captive audience doctrine—which has been applied sparingly, … should not be expanded to the circumstances here. Westboro stayed well away from the memorial service, Snyder could see no more than the tops of the picketers’ signs, and there is no indication that the picketing interfered with the funeral service itself. … > > (c) Because the First Amendment bars Snyder from recovery for intentional infliction of emotional distress or intrusion upon seclusion—the allegedly unlawful activity Westboro conspired to accomplish—Snyder also cannot recover for civil conspiracy based on those torts. … > > (d) Westboro addressed matters of public import on public property, in a peaceful manner, in full compliance with the guidance of local officials. It did not disrupt Mathew Snyder’s funeral, and its choice to picket at that time and place did not alter the nature of its speech. Because this Nation has chosen to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that public debate is not stifled, Westboro must be shielded from tort liability for its picketing in this case. ---
**Author:** ![Shoeless](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shoeless/32/7099_2.png) [@Shoeless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shoeless)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/42 "2011-03-02T22:22:42Z")
As much as I would have liked to have the Supreme Court tell the Phelpses to STFU, this ruling means that there’s nothing legally stopping me from picketing Fred’s funeral once he kicks the bucket. So I guess that’s a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/43 "2011-03-02T22:32:13Z")
> [@Shoeless](#): > > As much as I would have liked to have the Supreme Court tell the Phelpses to STFU, this ruling means that there’s nothing legally stopping me from picketing Fred’s funeral once he kicks the bucket. So I guess that’s a good thing. There was never anything stopping you from doing that. The ruling means that if you picket his funeral and do it in such a way that you’re following the law and commenting on national issues rather than a personal grudge, the family can’t sue you for emotional distress. ---
**Author:** ![DiosaBellissima](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a8b319/32.png) [@DiosaBellissima](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiosaBellissima)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/44 "2011-03-02T22:52:39Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > If that’s not sufficient to protect people like **DiosaBellissima** ’s friend, then make them protest quietly 2,000 feet away, or a mile. I won’t care one whit. It should be noted that they didn’t have the balls to actually show up at the funeral- they were in town, but the Hells Angels had put it out there that they’d pay any legal fees for anyone who got in trouble for defending the funeral against the Phelps. There were literally about 100 bikers parked, quietly, across from the funeral- sitting respectfully with their helmets off. But, what the Phelps did do is somehow get my friends phone number and harass her at her house. We have no way of knowing who actually called her, I supposem but there ya go. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/45 "2011-03-02T23:00:15Z")
I have more repect for Phelps than someone who threatens him with physical harm in order to shut him up. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/46 "2011-03-02T23:09:59Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > I have more repect for Phelps than someone who threatens him with physical harm in order to shut him up. Can’t say I agree. Phelps is either a nasty religious sociopath, or he’s leech who looks to tries to provoke people so he can sue them for money. Someone who threatens to beat his lights in at least has the depth of human feeling, even if that’s the wrong thing to do. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/47 "2011-03-02T23:19:01Z")
Yep, this was the right decision. I argued in both previous threads on this issue ([1](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=442385) [2](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580889)) that the Phelps protesters never should have lost the original case, and i’m glad the Supreme Court has done the right thing. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2011, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/48 "2011-03-02T23:49:55Z")
I just saw the ABC World News report on Snyder v. Phelps. Synder, interviewed after the Supreme Court decision was announced, weakened his own argument. He could have mentioned his son - and left it at that. But no. He had to drag other American service members into his already weak argument. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/49 "2011-03-03T00:41:06Z")
> [@Shoeless](#): > > As much as I would have liked to have the Supreme Court tell the Phelpses to STFU, this ruling means that there’s nothing legally stopping me from picketing Fred’s funeral once he kicks the bucket. So I guess that’s a good thing. It’s not so much his freedom to swill bullshit, it’s his determination to harass other people. He goes beyond any reasonable attempt to get his message out and focuses his energy on people already in emotional distress. It’s a psychotic adult version of “I’m not touching you, I’m not touching you”. I don’t see where the court attempted to address this and I’m assuming that was the point of the the lawsuit. I’m too tired to fight this but there is a case to be made that people at a funeral have reasonable expectations of situational peace. There are a millions of square miles of space the Phelps can stand on and express their ideas along with an infinite electronic space to do so. Sadly, we’re wasting time on a family who is probably doing this just for the lawsuit money. They are the absolute scum of the Earth and I’m not going to get worked up over them. ---
**Author:** ![Heyoka13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Heyoka13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heyoka13)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/50 "2011-03-03T01:12:41Z")
The Phelpses are indeed correct on their stand regarding divorce (agin it), I just wish they would be more vocal on that topic. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/51 "2011-03-03T01:21:25Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I don’t see where the court attempted to address this and I’m assuming that was the point of the the lawsuit. I’m too tired to fight this but there is a case to be made that people at a funeral have reasonable expectations of situational peace. And yet, if you’d actually read the accounts of what happened that day, and of the trials, you would know that the funeral-goers did, in fact, have “situational peace” (whatever the hell that means) on the day of the funeral. The person bringing the lawsuit admitted himself, during the course of the trial, that on the day of the funeral he never even saw or heard the Phelps clan. He only heard about their protest later on, in the media. And while other funeral-goers claim to have seen the protest, none of them were able to hear it because it was about 1000 feet away from the funeral itself. As the digest of the Supreme Court’s opinion, posted by **ascenray** , states very clearly: > [@](#): > > Westboro addressed matters of public import on public property, in a peaceful manner, in full compliance with the guidance of local officials. It did not disrupt Mathew Snyder’s funeral, and its choice to picket at that time and place did not alter the nature of its speech. Even in the original trial, in which the WBC was found liable and ordered to pay millions of dollars, it was accepted without question that the WBC had complied with all local laws and with the instructions of authorities in organizing and conducting the protest. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/52 "2011-03-03T02:28:51Z")
> [@Heyoka13](#): > > The Phelpses are indeed correct on their stand regarding divorce (agin it), I just wish they would be more vocal on that topic. Are you a fellow anti-divorce for everything but abuse and adultery person like me or is Phelps “progressive” on divorce? ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/53 "2011-03-03T02:32:45Z")
Listening to the oral arguments. Wow. I just love how the Justices talk down to the petitioner’s lawyers. Too obvious. Too funny. Dopers (including me) would make awesome Justices. I’d be Chief Justice of course. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/54 "2011-03-03T02:49:43Z")
Interestingly Phelps claims when he uses the term “faggot” he means metaphorically the bundles of wood homosexuals are setting on fire in Hell by their sin rather than it being a deregotary term for homosexuals. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/55 "2011-03-03T02:58:10Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > And yet, if you’d actually read the accounts of what happened that day, and of the trials, you would know that the funeral-goers did, in fact, have “situational peace” (whatever the hell that means) on the day of the funeral. It’s like talking to a wall. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/56 "2011-03-03T03:33:51Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It’s like talking to a wall. If by “a wall” you mean “something that understands this case, and the concept of free speech, better than you,” you are correct. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/57 "2011-03-03T03:39:47Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It’s not so much his freedom to swill bullshit, it’s his determination to harass other people. He goes beyond any reasonable attempt to get his message out and focuses his energy on people already in emotional distress. It’s a psychotic adult version of “I’m not touching you, I’m not touching you”. I don’t see where the court attempted to address this and I’m assuming that was the point of the the lawsuit. I’m too tired to fight this but there is a case to be made that people at a funeral have reasonable expectations of situational peace. There are a millions of square miles of space the Phelps can stand on and express their ideas along with an infinite electronic space to do so. > > Sadly, we’re wasting time on a family who is probably doing this just for the lawsuit money. They are the absolute scum of the Earth and I’m not going to get worked up over them. A court can’t rule on harassment if harassment is not in the facts if the case before it. ---
**Author:** ![Naxos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/50afbb/32.png) [@Naxos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naxos)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/58 "2011-03-03T03:43:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > [An 8-1 decision with Alito dissenting](http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/supreme_court_rules_first_amendment_protects_anti-gay_funeral_protesters_fr/) > > As contemptable as the Phelps clan may be, this is the right decision. Free speech is free speech. It definitely is. I want to see the offended Christians, Jews and Muslims respond to this. The US is at least 85% religious or one of those three Abrahamic religions. What that church is saying is: Your god is telling you through us, the protesters, that your fallen soldier son or daughter is condemned to Hell because you do not vote for Republicans to outlaw and persecute progressives and liberals, and that you don’t stone homosexuals to death! Very nice. That’s another one of those perks of religion. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/59 "2011-03-03T03:45:22Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > I want to see the offended Christians, Jews and Muslims respond to this. What response do you want to see? ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/60 "2011-03-03T03:48:47Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > It definitely is. > > I want to see the offended Christians, Jews and Muslims respond to this. The US is at least 85% religious or one of those three Abrahamic religions. > > What that church is saying is: Your god is telling you through us, the protesters, that your fallen soldier son or daughter is condemned to Hell because you do not vote for Republicans to outlaw and persecute progressives and liberals, and that you don’t stone homosexuals to death! > > Very nice. That’s another one of those perks of religion. Actually Phelps is virtually against every other church on Earth. In addition Mr. Phelps is a firm Democrat who praised Al Gore Sr. and has run in Democratic primaries. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222.md?page=4)