The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Westboro Baptist Church’s picketing of a slain U.S. soldier’s funeral is protected speech under the First Amendment. In an 8-to-1 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court upheld the decision of the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that threw out a $10.9 million judgment against Westboro Baptist resulting from a defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuit filed by the soldier’s father, Albert Snyder.
In his opinion, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that Westboro’s protests dealt with “broad issues of interest to society at large, rather than matters of ‘purely private concern,'” and were therefore afforded greater protection under the First Amendment. In addition, Roberts added, Westboro complied with the law by notifying local authorities before they staged their protest. “Simply put,” he wrote, “the church members had the right to be where they were.
Roberts’ conclusion merits a more lenghty excerpting, as it affords some valuable insight into how the chief justice views the First Amendment:
“Westboro believes that America is morally flawed; many Americans might feel the same about Westboro. Westboro’s funeral picketing is certainly hurtful and its contribution to public discourse may be negligible. But Westboro addressed matters of public import on public property, in a peaceful manner, in full compliance with the guidance of local officials. The speech was indeed planned to coincide with Matthew Snyder’s funeral, but did not itself disrupt that funeral, and Westboro’s choice to conduct its picketing at that time and place did not alter the nature of its speech.
“Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and — as it did here — inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker. As a Nation we have chosen a different course — to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate. That choice requires that we shield Westboro from tort liability for its picketing in this case.”
Justice Samuel Alito filed the lone dissent in the case, vehemently disagreeing with the majority opinion. “Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case,” he wrote. “The Court now holds that the First Amendment protected Respondents’ right to brutalize Mr. Snyder.”
For full coverage of Snyder v. Phelps, see the November 2010 issue of Supreme Court Debates, Protesting Military Funerals.
