Procrustes Stretched
"intuition and imagination and intelligence"
The protesters complied with local laws and instructions from the police about keeping their distance. They did not know the Snyders, and they had staged similar protests at other military funerals.
Mr. Snyders central claim is that the protesters intentionally inflicted emotional distress on him.
that damn liberal NYT...
The protesters complied with local laws and instructions from the police about keeping their distance. They did not know the Snyders, and they had staged similar protests at other military funerals.
Mr. Snyders central claim is that the protesters intentionally inflicted emotional distress on him.
In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment barred the Rev. Jerry Falwell from suing Hustler Magazine for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Hustler had published a parody of an advertisement suggesting that Mr. Falwell had incestuous sex in an outhouse. (Coincidentally, Mr. Falwell expressed views not wholly different from those of the funeral protesters, saying that the nations attitudes toward homosexuality and abortion had played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks.)
Mr. Snyder contends that the Hustler decision should not apply to suits brought by one private person against another. In libel and other cases, the Supreme Court has limited the First Amendment protection afforded to purely private speech.
A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, Va., unanimously ruled against Mr. Snyder, though the judges split 2-to-1 over the rationale. The majority said the messages on the protesters signs were protected under the First Amendment because they addressed matters of general interest.
As utterly distasteful as these signs are, Judge Robert B. King wrote for the majority, they involve matters of public concern, including the issues of homosexuals in the military, the sex-abuse scandal within the Catholic Church, and the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens.
The Supreme Court will consider the case, Snyder v. Phelps, No. 09-751, in the fall.