Supreme Court Decides in Favor of Wesboro Baptist

The United States Supreme Court this morning voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church in a case brought by the father of a Marine killed in Iraq whose funeral Westboro picketed in 2006. The majority opinion, only Samuel Alito dissented, determined whether Albert Snyder, the father of a Marine killed in Iraq, was entitled to monetary damages due to his suffering emotional damages as a result of Westboro’s protest at his son funeral in Westminster, MD five years ago.

Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder was 20 years-old when he died in Iraq in a non-combat-related vehicle accident in Al-Anbar province on March 3, 2006. Westboro Baptist church members staged a protest at Snyder’s funeral in his hometown of Westminster. The elder Snyder has claimed emotional distress and physical problems related to the protest, and has said he cannot separate memories of his son from the hate-filled protest.

The Court, however, found that Westboro was engaged in protected public, not private, speech “in a public place on a matter of public concern” and therefore Snyder was not due any damages.

“Simply put, the church members had the right to be where they were,” Chief Justice John Roberts said, writing for the majority. “Westboro alerted local authorities to its funeral protest and fully complied with police guidance on where the picketing could be staged. The picketing was conducted under police supervision some 1,000 feet from the church, out of the sight of those at the church. The protest was not unruly; there was no shouting, profanity, or violence.”

Roberts, however, went on to note the Court was not deciding on the larger Constitutional question of whether protests at funerals are protected. This ruling only affected Albert Snyder’s rights to compensation in this specific instance.

“Our holding today is narrow,” Roberts wrote. “We are required in First Amendment cases to carefully review the record, and the reach of our opinion here is limited by the particular facts before us.”

Roberts pointed out, as the Court has said in the past, that even reprehensible speech that the overwhelming majority of Americans disagrees with must be protected under the right to free speech. “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable,” Roberts wrote in today’s decision.

Left unsettled by the Court in this decision, however, is the larger of question of whether a state can block a person’s or group’s protest at a funeral. Maryland and 43 other states have passed laws in recent years barring demonstrations at funerals because of the Wesboro protests.

In an impassioned dissent, Justice Alito wrote that the right to free speech does not allow for “the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case.” Alito believes the Westboro Church member “brutally attacked Albert Snyder” and that he is entitled to damages as compensation for his suffering “severe and lasting emotional injury.”

Photo here.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *