The justices of the Supreme Court, on hearing a funeral protest case, seemed likely to set a limit to the First Amendment of the Constitution regarding the right to freedom of speech. In a case filed by the father of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder against the Phelps family of Kansas, the Supreme Court Justices will be forced to define the boundaries of free speech. The first amendment protects the speaker from infringement from the government, but the question is whether it also protects the speaker from private lawsuits.
The Phelps family traveled to Maryland in 2006 to hold anti-war and anti-gay signs at Marine Snyder’s funeral. In addition they put up messages against the father of the dead soldier on their website and referring to the dead Marine Snyder’s gay preferences. Snyder filed a suit in the courts under provision for intentional infliction of emotional distress. A Maryland court awarded him 5 million in damages but the verdict was thrown out on the basis of the first amendment. The court’s verdict will also reflect on the often vicious remarks made by the bloggers over the net.
The Phelps’ lawyer defended the family saying that the remarks were meant to provoke a nation wide discussion on the issues of American soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Justice Ginsburg said that she could not understand why this intrusion into the grief of the Marine’s family should be tolerated when there were so many other forums for getting the anti war and anti gay messages their due attention.
Many of the staunch supporters of the first amendment were finding common grounds on which the Snyders could win without diluting the importance of the public message intended.
It is not clear how long the Supreme Court is going to take before it arrives at a verdict.
