PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Argument recap in Snyder v. Phelps: Does emotion win?

Posted on October 6, 2010July 3, 2025 by Dissent

Lyle Denniston has another  insightful analysis and commentary on SCOTUSBlog over today’s oral arguments:

When the Supreme Court meets in private Friday to discuss Snyder v. Phelps, a profound question will hang over the discussion: Can we put aside our emotional reaction?  If the answer, implicit or otherwise, is no, then the case is over, and the First Amendment will from then on have a “funeral exception” to the right to speak out in public in outrageous and hurtful ways.  It was apparent, throughout an hour of oral argument Wednesday, that emotion was more dominant than law, at least among most of the Justices.  Perhaps typically, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who did seem to want to talk about legal principles, could not keep from pronouncing that “this is a case about exploiting a private family’s grief. Why should the First Amendment tolerate that?”

[…]

By the end of the argument, it seemed that, if the Justices could settle on a legal principle to govern funeral protests of the kind that greeted the service for Marine Lane Corporal Matthew Snyder, it might well be the compromise position suggested at one point by Justice Stephen G. Breyer. The First Amendment would allow a lawsuit for outrageously causing harm to someone’s emotional life — at least at a funeral — but limit it so that it would not forbid all forms of protests at such an event. As Breyer put it: “What I’m trying to accomplish, to allow this tort to exist but not allow the existence of it to interfere with an important public message where that is a reasonable thing to do.”

That approach also seemed to hold some appeal for Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who expressed his concern that the Westboro Baptists were seeking a constitutional right to follow around any individual who had a particular trait that the pursuers disliked, and making that person a target of outrageous comments. In addition, Kennedy openly invited counsel to “help us in finding some line” that would make such pursuits unprotected as free speech.

Read more on SCOTUSBlog

No related posts.

Category: CourtFeatured News

Post navigation

← State Dept. employee indicted for snooping in celebs’ passport files
UK: Woman accuses Glasgow City Council of leaking her details to smear her →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Flightradar24 receives reprimand for violating aircraft data privacy rights
  • Nebraska Attorney General Sues GM and OnStar Over Alleged Privacy Violations
  • Federal Court Allows Privacy Related Claims to Proceed in a Proposed Class Action Lawsuit Against Motorola
  • Italian Garante Adopts Statement on Health Data and AI
  • Trump administration is launching a new private health tracking system with Big Tech’s help
  • Attorney General James Takes Action to Protect Sensitive Personal Information of Tens of Millions of People
  • Searches of Your Private Data in the Cloud Amount to Illicit State Action

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Are Scattered Spider and ShinyHunters one group or two? And who did France arrest?
  • Why we shouldn’t just repeat ransomware groups’ claims, Sunday edition
  • Aftermath: More than 99% of providers opted to have Change Healthcare notify patients of its massive data breach
  • Qilin Ransomware Affiliate Panel Login Credentials Exposed Online
  • HCA Healthcare settled two lawsuits this week; one was over its 2023 data breach
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy